Singh v. K.w. Prunty’s Empirical Analysis
142 F.3d 1157 · 1998
Citation profile
15 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2019
15 federal appellate ·
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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Bagley · United States v. Agurs · Giglio v. United States
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“undermines confidence in the outcome of the trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“However, our fundamental concern remains whether there exists a reasonable probability that given disclosure of the evidence of benefits to [the witness], one or more members of the jury would have viewed [his] testimony in a different light.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Disclosure of an agreement to provide such benefits, as well as evidence of the benefits themselves, could have allowed the jury to reasonably conclude that [the informant] had a motive other than altruism for testifying on behalf of the State. Such a finding could have substantially impeached [the informant’s] credibility as a witness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Benn v. Lambert
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.