Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 163 F.3d 1222 - Tyler v. Nelson

Tyler v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis

163 F.3d 1222 · 1999

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
October 2014
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Aycox v. Lytle (1999), Boyd v. Ward (1999)

4 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

180199920002010decided

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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Lindh v. Murphy · Sheppard v. Maxwell · Henderson v. Kibbe · Holbrook v. Flynn

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Like the presence of guards at a defendant’s trial, the plaque ‘need not be interpreted as a sign that [Petitioner] is particularly dangerous or culpable.' The memorial plaque was small and therefore was not necessarily noticeable. Further, it was not located in the courtroom nor did it mention Petitioner’s name. Although the plaque may have served as a reminder of a police officer’s death, it did not necessarily serve as a reminder of Petitioner’s guilt or his special status as a defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Just as evaluating whether an error is harmless requires this court to assess the effects of the error in light of the record as a whole [citations omitted], applying the second prong of the Kansas self-defense test involves evaluating the evidence presented by the defendant in light of the totality of the circumstances and making an assessment about the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief that self-defense was necessary.” 163 F.3d at 1228 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We lack authority to correct errors of state law made by state courts.”
    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.