Two years ago, the Government prevailed in 8 of the 10 3-2 cases.  Last year, the defense prevailed in 9 of the 11 3-2 cases.  This year the pendulum swung back, with the Government winning 4 of the 5 3-2 cases.  Humphries was the only 3-2 case in which the defense prevailed.

Judge Stucky voted for the Government in all 5 3-2 cases.  Both Chief Judge Baker and Judge Ryan voted for the Government in 3 such cases.  Senior Judge Cox voted for the Government in all 3 of the 3-2 cases on which he sat.  Judge Erdmann voted for the defense in all 5 3-2 cases.  Last term, Judge Erdmann also voted for the defense in all of the 3-2 cases.  This term, Senior Judge Effron voted for the defense in both of the 3-2 cases on which he sat. 

Judges Stucky and Ryan tied as the most likely to be in the majority in a 3-2 case; each was in 4 such majorities (though not the same 4).  Senior Judge Cox was in the majority in all 3 of the 3-2 cases on which he sat.  Chief Judge Baker was in the majority of 2 of the 5 3-2 decisions.  Senior Judge Effron and Judge Erdmann tied as the least likely to be in the majority in a 3-2 case with 1 each.  But for Senior Judge Effron, that was 1 of only 2 3-2 cases on which he sat.  Judge Erdmann was in the majority of only 1 of the 5 3-2 cases on which he sat.

The most likely combination of judges in the majority of a 3-2 decision was Judge Stucky, Judge Ryan, and Senior Judge Cox, with 2.  The most likely combination of judges to be in dissent in a 3-2 decision was Chief Judge Baker and Judge Erdmann with 2.

Comments are closed.