3 Tenn. Crim. App. 124 - Huffman v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 1991
13 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 · Bumper v. North Carolina · Harrington v. California · Fahy v. Connecticut · Smith v. State
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. [The] mere failure to tell the jury that they are judges of the law is not necessarily reversible error. . [WJhere no injury could have resulted to defendant, it is not reversible error. Such a case is one where, whoever judged of the law, it was sufficiently and accurately charged, and as fully as should have been.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Judge v. State
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.