It occurred to me today to wonder about the 3-2 opinions during CAAF’s September 2009 term.

There were 10 3-2 opinions.  Here’s the most striking thing about them:  Judge Stucky voted for the government in all 10 cases.  Here’s the next most striking statistic:  Judge Erdmann voted for the government in only 1 of the 10:  Lloyd, in which he was the senior judge in the majority and assigned the opinion to himself.  Judge Baker was the second most likely to support the government in 3-2 opinions, with 7.  Judge Ryan was next with 6.  Chief Judge Effron was fourth with 4.

The most likely line-up in the majority was a tie.  Each of the following combinations produced 3 of the 10 3-2 majorities:  Chief Judge Effron, Judge Baker, and Judge Stucky (Neal, Clayton, Ferguson); and Judge Baker, Judge Stucky, and Judge Ryan (Cowgill, Smith, Ayala).  No other 3-2 line-up occurred more than once.

And here’s the breakdown of how often each judge was on the winning side of a 3-2 split: 

1.  Judge Stucky:  8

2.  Judge Baker:  7

3.  Chief Judge Effron:  6

      Judge Ryan:  6

5.  Judge Erdmann:  3

One Response to “Belay my last — one more set of end o’ term stats”

  1. John O'Connor says:

    I guess I’m surprised that you’re surprised. Judge Stucky voted for the Government side the most often, and Judge Erdmann the least. Given that, you’d expect that in the hardest cases (where each side garnered two or more votes) Judge Stucky would usually be expected to have broken for the Govenrment and Judge Erdmann for the accused.