Walker v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
322 F.2d 434 · 1963
Citation profile
86 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently February 2008 · most notably United States v. Calabro (1972), Estes v. United States (1964)
86 federal appellate · 19 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. § 2111
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Russell v. United States · Diaz v. United States · Hartman v. United States · Ballard 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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Counsel was present at all stages and had full opportunity to object to any irregularity. The juror’s inquiry related to a question of law, not fact, and was adequately covered by the court’s instructions given earlier in the appellant’s presence. Appellant’s presence would have been no aid to his defense and it is apparent that he suffered no prejudice.” 24”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Harmless Error. Any error, defect, irregularity or variance which does not affect substantial rights shall he disregarded. (b) Plain Error. Plain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court. ;”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noffke v. State“But, like other rules for the conduct of trials, it is not an end in itself; and, while lapses should be closely scrutinized, when it appears with certainty that no harm has been done, it would be the merest pedantry to iniist upon procedural regularity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noffke 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.