Alvarez v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis
225 F.3d 820 · 2000
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably State v. Tully (2011), State v. Mayo (2007)
27 federal appellate · 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Williams v. Taylor · Rose v. Clark · Taylor v. Kentucky · United States v. Rivera · United States v. Necoechea
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) at least two errors were committed in the course of the trial; (2) considered together along with the entire record, the multiple errors so infected the jury's deliberation that they denied the petitioner a fundamentally fair trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Of necessity, claims under the cumulative error doctrine are sui gener-is. A reviewing tribunal must consider each such claim against the background of the case as a whole, paying particular weight to factors such as the nature and number of the errors committed; their interrelationship, if any, and combined effect; how the [trial] court dealt with the errors as they arose (including the efficacy — or lack of efficacy — of any remedial efforts); and the strength of the [State’s] case. The run of the trial may also be important; a handful of miscues, in combination, may often pack a greater punch in a short trial than in a much longer trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hester“The cumulative effect of two or more individually harmless errors has the potential to prejudice a defendant to the same extent as a single reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Harris
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.