Robinson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 state decisions

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

1. “The United States Supreme Court has restricted use of structural error, with its requirement of automatic reversal, to "a limited class of cases." Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 468-69 , 117 S.Ct. 1544, 1549-50 , 187 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997). These errors appear to have in common the violation of a right granted by the Constitution, rather than a violation of due process by failure to afford a right granted by state statute. Among these are a faulty jury instruction on reasonable doubt, Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 282 , 113 S.Ct. 2078, 2083 , 124 LEd.2d 182 (1998); intentional racial discrimination in selection of grand jurors, Vasquez v. Hillery, 474 U.S. 254, 2683-64 , 106 S.Ct. 617, 623 , 88 L.Ed.2d 598 (1986); denial of the right to a public trial, Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 49 , 104 S.Ct. 2210, 2217 , 81 L.Ed.2d 31 (1984); denial of the right to self-representation, McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 , 177 n. 8, 104 S.Ct. 944 , 950 n. 8, 79 L.Ed.2d 122 (1984); improper exelusion of qualified capital jurors, Davis v. Georgiq, 429 U.S. 122, 123 , 97 S.Ct. 399, 400 , 50 L.Ed.2d 889 (1976) (per curiam ); exposure to improper publicity which wholly denies the defendant an impartial jury, Sheppard v. Maxwell, 884 U.S. 333 , 351-852, 86 S.Ct. 1507, 1516 , 16 L.Ed.2d 600 (1966); failure to afford a defendant the right to counsel, Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 , 345, 83 S.Ct. 792, 797 , 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1968); and the lack of an impartial trial judge, Tumey v. ”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. MOORE v. STATE · Miller v. State

2. “[t]here is a strong presumption that errors which occur during trial are subject to harmless error analysis, as long as a defendant is represented by counsel and is tried by an impartial judge.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. BARNES v. STATE · DUCLOS v. STATE

3. “such as the absence of counsel for a defendant, a biased judge, the unlawful exclusion of members of the defendant's race from a grand jury, the right to self-representation at trial, and the right to a public trial.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2022 OK CIV APP 19 - LOPEZ-VELAZQUEZ v. GUITTIERREZ DE ALCALA · IN THE MATTER OF K. H.