Smith v. Horn’s Empirical Analysis
120 F.3d 400 · 1997
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Lambert v. Blackwell (1997), Howard v. Bouchard (2005)
38 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Coleman v. Thompson · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Arizona v. Fulminante
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury has applied the challenged instructions in a way’ that violates the Constitution.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[A]n accomplice is a person if with the intent of promoting or facilitating the commission of a crime he solicits, commands, encourages or requests the other person or persons to commit that crime or crimes, or aids, agrees to aid, or attempts to aid the other person in the planning or committing the [sic] crime.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“If, and I emphasize this, you find that one was the accomplice of the other and that one of the two actually performed the killing, you, the jurors, need not agree on the role or roles played by the respective parties; that is, by this defendant and his accomplice, if you find that that was the position of both, provided that each of you is satisfied that the crime was actually perpetrated by the defendant or by the accomplice of the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.