Henderson v. Lane’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.2d 175 · 1980
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably United States v. Phillips (1981), State v. Williams (1983)
19 federal appellate · 13 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 · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Wade v. Hunter · Patton v. United States · Williams v. Florida
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he interposition between the accused and his accuser of the commonsense judgment of a group of laymen, and in the community participation and shared responsibility that results from that group’s determination of guilt or innocence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The petitioner has not shown any irregularities in the initial selection of the alternate juror; the alternates were subject to the same selection procedures as the regular jurors. *** The alternate jurors heard the evidence and were instructed on the law with the regular jurors. The petitioner’s defense attorney was present during the reinstatement proceedings and was permitted to examine the alternate juror about his activities after dismissal and the possibility that the juror had formed opinions about guilt or innocence during that time. It was only after the juror’s assurance that he was still able to perform his duties properly and the defense counsel’s statement that he saw no alternatives that the trial court reinstated the juror. *** [Pjerhaps no procedure will be perfect for dealing with these difficult and unforeseeable circumstances ***. *** [However], [bjecause the essential feature of the jury was preserved, the defendant’s *** challenge to the substitution procedure must fail.” Henderson, 613 F.2d at 178-79 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Alternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties .... An alternate juror who does not replace a regular juror shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.