Parle v. Runnels’s Empirical Analysis
505 F.3d 922 · 2007
Citation profile
17 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Hooks v. Workman (2012), Littlejohn v. Trammell (2013)
17 federal appellate ·
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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Chapman v. State of California · Glasser v. United States · Williams v. Taylor · 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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under traditional due process principles, cumulative error warrants habeas relief only where the errors have “so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.” Such “infection” occurs where the combined effect of the errors had a “substantial and injurious effect or influence on the jury’s verdict.” In simpler terms, where the combined effect of individually harmless errors renders a criminal defense “far less persuasive than it might [otherwise] have been,” the resulting conviction violates due process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Relief is 'inadequate or ineffective' if it resulted in a 'decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Reed v. Thomas“[t]aken together, the wrongful admission of [the government's evidence] and the erroneous exclusion of [the defense evidence] left the jury with only half the picture.”
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.