Thomas v. Arn’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.2d 865 · 1983
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Byrd v. Collins (2000), Women's Medical Professional Corp. v. Voinovich (1997)
30 federal appellate · 1 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 · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Wainwright v. Sykes · Holland v. United States · Mullaney v. Wilbur
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'* * * if after a full and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are firmly convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the truth of the charge or charges, then the State has proved its case and you must find the defendant guilty. "'If you are not firmly convinced of the truth of the charge, then the State has not proved its case and you must find the defendant not guilty.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This Court has consistently recognized that there are certain “justification[s] for admitted conduct” allowed to a defendant in a criminal case, provable for the most part under the plea of not guilty, which are referred to as “affirmative defenses.” As characterized by one authority, they represent not a mere denial or contradiction of evidence which the prosecution has offered as proof of an essential element of the crime charged, but, rather, they represent a substantive or independent matter “which the defendant claims exempts him from liability even if it is conceded that the facts claimed by the prosecution are true.” Among those defenses in Ohio, are self-defense, duress, insanity and intoxication. (emphasis added). Id,., 294 N.E.2d at 889 (quoted in Thomas v. Arn, 704 F.2d 865, 877 (6th Cir.1983); accord, State v. Jones, 423 N.E.2d 447 , 67 Ohio St.2d 244 (1981); State v. Humphries, 364 N.E.2d 1354 , 51 Ohio St.2d 95 (1977); State v. Robinson, 351 N.E.2d 88 , 47 Ohio St.2d 103 , 1 O.O.3d 61 (1976).________”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Mann v. Gray“Where state law includes unlawfulness or the absence of self-defense as an element of murder, the courts have held instructions putting the burden of proving self-defense upon the defendant to be constitutionally infirm under Mullaney.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. White v. Arn
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.