Neal v. Cain’s Empirical Analysis
141 F.3d 207 · 1998
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably York v. State (2011), Ex Parte Taylor (2002)
5 federal appellate · 4 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 Strickland v. Washington · Ashe v. Swenson · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Abney v. United States · Gilbert v. First National Bank of Jackson
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We will not grant habeas relief for errors in a trial court’s evidentiary rulings unless those errors result in a “denial of fundamental fairness” under the Due Process Clause. The erroneous admission of prejudicial evidence will justify habeas relief only if the admission was a crucial, highly significant factor in the defendant’s conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“That [the defendant] was convicted on the lesser-included offense ... seems to represent a compromise between those members of the jury favoring conviction and those favoring acquittal. Nevertheless, our task is to make legal sense of the jury's verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Langley v. Prince
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.