Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 662 F.2d 177 - Krische v. Smith

Krische v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

662 F.2d 177 · 1981

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably Voutour v. Vitale (1985), United States v. Frazin (1986)

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

16019811990200020102020decided

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 · Kotteakos v. United States · Picard v. Connor · Allen v. United States · Bollenbach 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he several decisions in this circuit reviewing the conduct of a trial judge in sending messages to a deliberating jury without notice to defendant or his counsel uniformly ha[ve] been decided without any significant distinction between the two standards,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he opportunity to participate in the drafting of a proper form of Allen charge was lost”). 50 . See Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105-06 , 54 S.Ct. 330 , 78 L.Ed. 674 (1934) (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “has found reversible error by applying only the Kotteakos standard”
    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.