Lewis v. Pinchak’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

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.

1. “[t]he same constitutionally protected interest is at stake when there is a Carter [ v. Kentucky, supra, 450 U.S. 288 , 101 S.Ct. 1112 ] violation and, if anything, the jeopardy to that interest is greater when a prosecutor improperly comments on a defendant's failure to testify. A prosecutor's comment on a defendant's decision not to testify affirmatively places the inference of guilt before the jury, while the failure to instruct the jury only creates the possibility that the jury will, on its own, draw an inference of guilt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Ruocco

2. “[T]he ultimate issue under either test reduces to determining what effect, if any, the erroneous instruction had on the jury’s verdict. Accordingly, if [the petitioner] demonstrates that the erroneous instruction had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict, such that it was not harmless under Brecht, he has also demonstrated that there is a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 56 F. Supp. 3d 709 - Howard v. Horn