Eddleman v. McKee’s Empirical Analysis
471 F.3d 576 · 2006
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 2025
10 federal appellate · 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 Chapman v. State of California · Williams v. Taylor · Kotteakos v. United States · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Brecht v. Abrahamson
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A. constitutional error is harmless when “it appears ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.’ ” Neder [v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 15 , 119 S.Ct. 1827 , 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999) (quoting Chapman, 386 U.S. at 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 ).] We may not grant [a] habeas petition, however, if the state court simply erred in concluding that the State’s errors were harmless; rather, habeas relief is appropriate only if the Ohio Court of Appeals applied harmless-error review in an “objectively unreasonable” manner.”
1 later decision 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.