Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 F.3d 187 - Levasseur v. Pepe

Levasseur v. Pepe’s Empirical Analysis

70 F.3d 187 · 1995

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Bailey v. Nagle (1999), Gunter v. Maloney (2002)

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions

1501995200020102020decided

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 Kotteakos v. United States · Coleman v. Thompson · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Manson v. Brathwaite · Dennis v. Dennis

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the extent to which the error permeated the proceeding, (2) the centrality of the issue affected by the error to the case as actually tried, and (3) the relative strength of the properly admitted evidence of guilt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the error substantially affected the jury. Was the properly admitted evidence so strong that it overwhelmed the impact of the [error]?”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “simply because [the] reviewing court fe[els] that [the] petitioner 'would have been convicted even if the constitutional error had not taken place.'”
    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.