State v. Van Kirk’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 district · 289 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 295 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Derbyshire (2009), State v. Garrymore (2006)
2 district · 289 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 Chapman v. State of California · Gideon v. Wainwright · Arizona v. Fulminante · Harrington v. California · Tumey v. State of Ohio
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 295 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n order to prove that trial error was harmless, the State must demonstrate that there is no reasonable possibility that the inadmissible evidence might have contributed to the conviction.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Matt · State v. Nordholm“Whenever the record on appeal contains any order, ruling, or proceeding of the trial court against the convicted person affecting the convicted person’s substantial rights on the appeal of the cause, together with any required objection of the convicted person, the supreme court on that appeal shall consider the orders, rulings, or proceedings and the objections thereto and shall reverse or affirm the cause on the appeal according to the substantial rights of the respective parties, as shown upon the record. A cause may not be reversed by reason of any error committed by the trial court against the convicted person unless the record shows that the error was prejudicial.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“contributed to the defendant's conviction.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Matt · State v. Mills
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.