514 So. 2d 741 - State v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The test for harmless error established in State v. Gibson, 391 So.2d 421 (La.1980) was adopted from Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967), and consists of a two prong analysis: 1) the reviewing court must ask whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction, and 2) the court must be able to declare a belief that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. In later cases, the Supreme Court suggested that the reviewing court ask whether overwhelming evidence to support the jury's verdict remains once the erroneously admitted error is disregarded; that there is no reasonable doubt the jury would have reached the same verdict without hearing the erroneous evidence. Milton v. Wainwright, 407 U.S. 371 , 92 S.Ct. 2174 , 33 L.Ed.2d 1 (1972). The focus is on the impact of the error." [Emphasis in Bailey . ]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Taylor · 583 So. 2d 42 - State v. Caston