James v. People’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
July 2024
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Olano · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Sullivan v. Louisiana
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[1] errors concerning rights protecting some interest other than the defendant 's interest in not being erroneously convicted; [2] errors the effects of which are too hard to measure, in the sense of being necessarily unquantifiable and indeterminate; and [3] errors that can be said to always result in fundamental unfairness,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hatever may be the continued vitality of our juror-substitution line of cases . . ., we [did] not understand the considerations expressed in those cases to govern the harmlessness of an 'intrusion' by an alternate upon the deliberations of a properly constituted jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“that our reliance on federal case law for the proposition that an error of constitutional magnitude is committed by the mere presence of an alternate juror in the jury room during deliberations has turned out to have been mistaken.”
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.