Llewellyn v. Stynchcombe’s Empirical Analysis
609 F.2d 194 · 1980
Citation profile
48 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably United States v. Brooks (1992), United States v. Bagnariol (1981)
48 federal appellate · 5 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Remmer v. United States · Michelson v. United States · Mattox v. United States · Rogers v. United States
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a defendant is entitled to a new trial unless there is no reasonable possibility that the jury's verdict was influenced by the material that improperly came before it.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(i)nquiries that seek to probe the mental process of jurors . . . are impermissible.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Where a colorable showing of extrinsic influence appears, a court must investigate the asserted impropriety: The evidentiary inquiry before the district court ... must be limited to objective demonstration of extrinsic factual matter disclosed in the jury room. Having determined the precise quality of the jury breach, if any, the district court must then determine whether there was a reasonable possibility that the breach was prejudicial to the defendant_ In this determination, prejudice is assumed in the form of a rebuttable presumption, and the burden is on the Government to demonstrate the harmlessness of any breach to the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.