Ristaino v. Ross’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
450 federal appellate · 41 district · 410 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,155 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably Smith v. Phillips (1982), Powers v. Ohio (1991)
450 federal appellate · 41 district · 410 state decisions — followed in 40 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedRoss v. Ristaino (from First Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Irvin v. Dowd · Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Rideau v. Louisiana · Turner v. Louisiana · Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba
Cited together with Ham v. South Carolina · Rosales-Lopez v. United States · Irvin v. Dowd · Aldridge v. United States · Turner v. Murray
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 1,155 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“inextricably bound up with the conduct of the trial,”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Turner v. Murray · Isiah v. Tansy“the essential fairness required by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that under the facts shown by this record the petitioner be permitted to have the jurors interrogated on the issue of racial bias”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“to have questions posed during voir dire specifically directed to matters that conceivably might prejudice veniremen against him.”
12 later decisions 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.