Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 317 F.3d 934 - Dyas v. Poole

Dyas v. Poole’s Empirical Analysis

317 F.3d 934 · 2002

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Deck v. Missouri (2005), In Re Davis (2004)

12 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

150200220102020decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Holbrook v. Flynn · Parker v. Gladden · Ghent v. Woodford

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

  1. “the state court of appeal held against Dyas the absence of evidence of what the jury could see, which was contrary to the requirement of Chapman , 386 U.S. at 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , that the prosecution bear the burden of showing harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he California Court of Appeal held that keeping Dyas shackled during trial was constitutional error ... [but] then ruled ... that the error was harmless because the trial court had 'found' that the jurors would not be able to see the shackles from the jury box.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[p]rejudice is particularly likely here because at least one juror saw Dyas's shackles during the trial from the jury box. It is likely that other jurors saw the shackles, but if even one juror is biased by the sight of the shackles, prejudice can result.”
    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.