Lamar v. Banks’s Empirical Analysis
684 F.2d 714 · 1982
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently July 2017
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Townsend v. Sain · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · Sumner v. Mata
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he circumstances surrounding the words can be crucial, for only against the background of surrounding events can a judgment be made whether [the] words had a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by [others].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“First of all, it makes no sense for the defendant’s criminality to depend on the actual reaction of the hearer of the accused words. Under the rule proposed, if the young woman had struck Lamar, or struck at him, he would be validly convicted, but because she had the prudence to restrain herself, his words would be constitutionally protected. It is the tendency or likelihood of the words to provoke violent reaction that is the touchstone of the Chaplinsky test, not whether in a given case violence was desired by the speaker or actually occurred....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“this court finds that there was sufficient evidence to justify the fact finder in this case finding the Defendant ... guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Stokes v. Singletary
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.