Miller v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably State v. Rothenberg (1985), Hebel v. Conrail, Inc. (1985)
24 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
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Rideout v. United States · Ristaino v. Ross · Loyd v. State · Gaddis v. State
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"If, when all is said and done, the conviction is sure that the error did not influence the jury, or had but very slight effect, the verdict and the judgment should stand... . But if one cannot say, with fair assurance, after pondering all that happened without stripping the erroneous action from the whole, that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error, it is impossible to conclude that substantial rights were not affected. The inquiry cannot be merely whether there was enough to support the result, apart from the phase affected by the error. It is rather, even so, whether the error itself had substantial influence. If so, or if one is left in grave doubt, the conviction cannot stand." Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 764-767 , 66 S.Ct. 1239, 1247-1249 , 90 L.Ed. 1557, 1566-1567 (1946).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Stwalley v. State · Haynes v. State“"When, as here, however, there has been an error in the admission of evidence, we are required to determine whether or not such error was harmful. (Cites omitted.) # * a * a * "When, as in the case before us, the verdict is dependent, in such a large part, upon the jury's assessment of the credibility of the witness and the error bears heavily upon that credibility, determining whether or not the error was harmful may require a weighing of the evidence and an assessment of ecredibility-not with a view of redetermining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict but rather, to assess the potential of the error for influencing the verdict." Miller, supra, 436 N.E.2d at 1114 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lambert v. State““... evidence of prior crimes is inadmissible in rape cases where the act charged has been proven or admitted and the only issue concerns the consent of the prosecu-trix.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Malone 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.