Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 488 FSUPP 59 - Simon v. Kuhlman

Simon v. Kuhlman’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
September 2007
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 2007

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

301979198019902000decided

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 · United States v. Wade · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Manson v. Brathwaite

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.

  1. “To determine whether the experiment raised a possibility of prejudice to petitioner, this court must ascertain whether the experiment actually took place ánd, if so, under what conditions. Although the list which follows is by no means intended to be exclusive, areas of inquiry relevant to the issue to be decided are: (1) how the experiment came about; (2) how many jurors were involved; (3) whether the jurors discussed the results of the experiment and, if so, what was said; and (4) whether the experiment took place before or after the jurors reached a verdict and if the experiment took place before the verdict was reached, at what point in the deliberation it occurred.”
    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.