Skip to content

Menu

ChannelsPublishersSubscribe
LexBlog, Inc. logo
LexBlog, Inc. logo
ProductsSub-MenuBlogsPortalsTwentySyndicationMicrositesResource Center
Join
Search
Close
Join the Movement. Blog 4 Good

How Often Does the Supreme Court Review Unanimous Criminal Decisions From the Appellate Court?

By Kirk Jenkins on December 16, 2020
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn

Last time, we reviewed the year-by-year percentage of the Supreme Court’s civil caseload that is drawn from Appellate Court cases with a dissenter to evaluate the claim that a petition for leave to appeal from a unanimous decision is a hopeless exercise.  This time, we’re looking at the Court’s criminal cases.  Just like last time, the graph reports the percentage of cases with a dissenter below, so if the Court only reviews divided decisions, it should be close to 100%.

It isn’t.  The share of divided Appellate Court decisions was 21.74% in 1990 and 25.86% in 1991, but fell for most of the rest of the nineties – 11.96% (1992), 2.33% (1993), 15.38% (1994), 3.8% (1995), 1.85% (1996), 9.52% (1997) and 6.94% (1998).  After a one year uptick to 13.21% in 1999, it was back in single digits in 2000 (6.98%) and 2001 (8.62%).

Over the past twenty years, divided decisions have become a bit more prominent in the criminal docket, but not much.  By 2007, cases with dissenters had risen to 28.57%.  By 2010, it was 32.73%.  It fell to 13.16% by 2013 but was back up to 23.53% in 2014 and 33.33% in 2015.  In 2016, the share was 20%.  After being nearly flat the following year at 20.59%, it rose to 30.77% in 2018.  Divided decisions were 19.05% of the criminal docket in 2019, but so far in 2020, 39.29% of the criminal docket had dissenters below.

Join us back here next time as we turn our attention to a new topic.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by John DiLiberto (no changes).

Photo of Kirk Jenkins Kirk Jenkins

Kirk Jenkins brings a wealth of experience to his appellate practice, which focuses on antitrust and constitutional law, as well as products liability, RICO, price fixing, information sharing among competitors and class certification. In addition to handling appeals, he also regularly works with…

Kirk Jenkins brings a wealth of experience to his appellate practice, which focuses on antitrust and constitutional law, as well as products liability, RICO, price fixing, information sharing among competitors and class certification. In addition to handling appeals, he also regularly works with trial teams to ensure that important issues are properly presented and preserved for appellate review.  Mr. Jenkins is a pioneer in the application of data analytics to appellate decision-making and writes two analytics blogs, the California Supreme Court Review and the Illinois Supreme Court Review, as well as regularly writing for various legal publications.

Read more about Kirk JenkinsEmail Kirk's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Appellate
  • Blog:
    Illinois Supreme Court Review
  • Organization:
    Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Stay Connected

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers

Company

  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service

Products

  • Products
  • Blogs
  • Portals
  • Twenty
  • Syndication
  • Microsites

Support

  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • The Capital Commitment
  • Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation
  • Restrictive Covenant Report
  • PFAS and Emerging Contaminants
  • Privacy Law Blog
Copyright © 2021, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered By LexBlog