Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 19 F.3d 110 - Kontakis v. Beyer

Kontakis v. Beyer’s Empirical Analysis

19 F.3d 110 · 1994

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
December 2014
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Whitney v. Horn (2002), Smith v. Horn (1997)

20 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

200199420002010decided

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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Kotteakos v. United States · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Arizona v. Fulminante · Estelle v. McGuire

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

  1. “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “her. At trial the child not only exonerated the defendant, she identified another man as her assailant. [3] Because neither White nor Wright specifically says that the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule is”
    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.