Lynnwell Smith v. W. J. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections’s Empirical Analysis
527 F.2d 430 · 1976
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Hillard v. State (1979), Harryman v. Estelle (1980)
28 federal appellate · 1 district · 14 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Wong Sun v. United States · Escobedo v. Illinois · Jackson v. Denno
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“""The same principle that prohibits the use of confessions [unlawfully] procured also prohibits the use of ... the fruit of the poisonous tree, to invoke a time-worn metaphor. * * * If he [took the stand] in order to overcome the impact of confessions illegally obtained and hence improperly introduced, then his testimony was tainted by the same illegality that rendered the confessions themselves inadmissible.' Harrison v. United States, 1968, 392 U.S. 219, 222-23 [ 88 S.Ct. 2008, 2010 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 ].... If Smith would not have taken the stand but for the admission of his unlawful pre-trial confession ... then his trial testimony was tainted thereby and cannot be considered as independent evidence of guilt for purposes of applying the harmless error rule." Smith v. Estelle, 527 F.2d at 433 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[n]otwithstanding the fact that counsel's decision to have his client take the stand may have involved communication with his client, [petitioner] would not be able to invoke the attorney-client privilege on remand in a post-conviction case”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent““Confessions — unlawful but not involuntary — admitted into evidence but obtained without having given the warnings required by Miranda are subject to the harmless error rule.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.