Lane v. Warden’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2007 · most notably Spencer v. State of Texas a Bell (1967), United States v. Duncan (1979)
25 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Irvin v. Dowd · Brown v. Allen · Palko v. State of Connecticut · Oyler v. Boles · Michelson v. United States
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The denial of a fair and impartial trial, as guaranteed by the 6th Amendment to the Constitution, is also a denial of due process, demanded by the 5th and 14th Amendments, and the failure to strictly observe these constitutional safeguards renders a trial and conviction for a criminal offense illegal and void and redress therefor is within the ambit of habeas corpus.” Citing many IT. S. Supreme Court cases.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * It cannot be believed that an accused man would ever have a fair trial, resulting in a verdict not affected by prejudice or by considerations by which the jury should not be influenced, if during that trial allegations that he has twice before been convicted of state prison crimes have been read to the jury, and evidence of his former convictions has been placed before them. * * *””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Impartiality is not a technical conception. It is a state of mind. For the ascertainment of this mental attitude of appropriate indifference, the Constitution lays down no particular tests and procedure is not chained to any ancient and artificial formula.” United States v. Wood, 299 U.S. 123 , 57 S.Ct. 177 , 81 L.Ed. 78 (1936).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Durham v. Cox
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.