Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 53 KANAPP2D 734 - State v. Johnson – Hill

State v. Johnson – Hill’s Empirical Analysis

2017

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Arizona v. Fulminante · Gomez v. United States · Capital Traction Co. v. Hof · United States v. Marcus · United States v. Marcus

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

  1. “As I mentioned to you yesterday in my very preliminary instructions, the role of the judge and the jury are different. You are the trier of facts. I decide what evidence you will hear and what instructions you will receive. I don't believe during the course of this trial yesterday afternoon there were any objections raised that I had to make rulings on that would have been affected by my nodding off. I acknowledge myself, ladies and gentlemen, that I did nod off some. I doubt that I'm the first judge in America that's ever done that.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[a] new structural error standard applied in these situations would be without precedent, unnecessary, and prone to abuse by defense counsel.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “THE COURT: Very well. With that then we'll proceed on. Mr. Roush, you may call your next witness.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.