Durr v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1991
1 district · 2 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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Davis v. Alaska · Fay v. Noia · Pointer v. Texas · Brown v. Allen
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““amounted to taking the truck into the juryroom and having it available in deliberations by that body before reaching its verdict of guilty ... [T]he actions of the jury foreman constitutionally were impermissible, and amounted to evidence being introduced without knowledge or consent of the court and without defendant or the State being able to contest, or make inquiry, as to the evidence thus adduced. This is one of the basic rights enunciated by the Sixth Amendment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to taking the truck into the jury room and having it available in deliberations by that body before reaching its verdict of guilty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Durr v. Cook J“had reenacted the crime, and told the other jury members about his results.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Durr v. Cook J
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.