Beathard v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
177 F.3d 340 · 1999
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2022
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 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 · Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · Giglio v. United States · Townsend v. Sain
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[C]losing arguments are not evidence. Moreover, a prosecutor can make inconsistent arguments at the separate trials of codefendants without violating the due process clause.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Upon request of a defendant, a trial court shall instruct jurors that they may not draw any adverse inference from a defendant’s failure to testify ....” (emphasis supplied)); United States v. Flores, 63 F.3d 1342, 1376 (5th Cir.1995) (”
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.