Lower Court Disagreement
2 [ view ]
An entry in this variable indicates that the Supreme Court's majority opinion mentioned that one or more of the members of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed dissented. The presence of such disagreement is limited to a statement to this effect somewhere in the majority opinion. I.e, "divided," "dissented,"
"disagreed," "split." A reference, without more, to the "majority" or "plurality" does not necessarily evidence dissent. The other judges may have concurred.
If a case arose on habeas corpus, a dissent will be indicated if either the last federal court or the last state court to review the case contained one. E.g., Townsend v. Sain, 9 Led 2d 770 (1963). A dissent will also be indicated if the highest court with jurisdiction to hear the case declines to do so by a divided vote. E.g., Simpson v. Florida, 29 L ed 2d 549 (1971).
Note that the focus of this variable tends to be a statement that a dissent occurred rather than the fact of such an occurrence. The fact of a dissent is not always mentioned in the majority opinion. It may be irrelevant. See, for example, McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987), and United States v. Gray and McNally, 790 F.2d 1290 (1986).
If the lower c ourt denies an en banc petition by a divided vote and the Supreme Court discusses same, lower court disagreement exists.
If the lower court denies an en banc petition by a divided vote and the Supreme Court's opinion discusses same, a dissent occurs.
no mention that dissent occurred
dissent in ct whose dec the sct reviewed
Voting & Opinion Variables