Burton v. Bergman’s Empirical Analysis
649 F.2d 428 · 1981
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Wainwright v. Sykes · Sandstrom v. Montana · Harrington v. California
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(i)f the trial court had refrained from giving the improper instruction, the jury might have entertained a reasonable doubt (that Clark had a purpose to kill the victim). Such an error cannot be harmless.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Clark v. Jago · Burton v. Foltz“the inference that petitioner intended to murder Ms. Boulley when he assaulted her is by no means inescapable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Clark v. Jago · Burton v. Foltz“the trial court's instructions created a substantial risk that the jury would believe the presumption provided the necessary proof of petitioner's intent beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Clark v. Jago
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.