State v. Banks’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably 603 So. 2d 731 - State v. Hearold (1992), 779 So. 2d 675 - State v. Cosey (2000)
1 federal appellate · 51 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 Chapman v. State of California · 391 So. 2d 421 - State v. Gibson · Louisiana Resources Co. v. Stream · 404 So. 2d 466 - State v. Lindsey · 399 So. 2d 551 - State v. Spell
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Additionally, we think that the Chapman rule provides a helpful supplemental guide in cases involving only errors of state procedure or state law. Our state constitution and statutory harmless error rule admonish a reviewing court generally to shun factual questions and to reverse only when substantial rights of the accused have been affected. In some of our recent decisions we may have come perilously close to violating both rules because of their lack of specific content.3 It appears that the Chapman test, i.e., `whether there is a reasonable possibility that the evidence complained of might have contributed to the conviction' and that `the court must be able to declare a belief that [the error] was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt,' will assist this Court to fulfill both of the requirements of state law." (Footnote omitted)”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Smith · State v. Williams“... there was other evidence of the truth of the out of court statements; either the speaker was present for cross-examination, or there was independent evidence which confirmed the hearsay.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“was the very first evidence that the state put on, and probably was of a lasting impression on the factfinder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.