Claudio v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 60 Cal. 4th 335 - People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler (2014), 214 Ill. 2d 106 - People v. Roberts (2005)
3 federal appellate · 67 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
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Benton v. Maryland · Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Palko v. State of Connecticut
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused hath a right to be heard by ... his or her counsel.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Xenidis · Gannon v. State“[A] juror may testify on the question whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury’s attention or whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror. 28”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed_”
2 later decisions 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.