United States v. Stabler’s Empirical Analysis
490 F.2d 345 · 1974
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently June 2008 · most notably United States v. Stephen G. Scholle, United States of America v. Michael S. Needham (1977), United States v. Delay (1974)
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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 18 U.S.C. § 1111
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Wong Sun v. United States · Kotteakos v. United States · Opper v. United States · Smith v. United States
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 39 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.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where the crime involves physical damage to person or property, the prosecution must generally show that the injury for which the accused confesses responsibility did in fact occur, and that some person was criminally culpable. A notable example is the principle that an admission of homicide must be corroborated by tangible evidence of the death of the supposed victim. There need in such a ease be no link, outside the confession, between the injury and the accused who admits having inflicted it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“none of the stated independent evidence associates the defendant with the commission of the crime”
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.