Eslaminia v. White’s Empirical Analysis
136 F.3d 1234 · 1998
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Wayne Dale Schell v. Larry Witek Bill Lockyer (2000), William Jones v. Ml Smith Attorney General State of California (2000)
19 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Kotteakos v. United States · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Tumey v. State of Ohio
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict.'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o be truly considered cumulative, there must be an extremely close relationship between the extrinsic evidence and the evidence actually admitted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[structural error are relatively rare, and consist of serious violations that taint the entire trial process, thereby rendering appellate review of the magnitude of the harm suffered by the defendant virtually impossible.... By contrast, jury consideration of taped comments by a non-testifying party raises discrete evidentiary issues that the court may clearly identify and analyze, and is similar to other commonly-recognized trial errors.”
1 later decision 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.