Arthur v. Bordenkircher’s Empirical Analysis
715 F.2d 118 · 1983
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2017
5 federal appellate · 7 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
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Gideon v. Wainwright · McMann v. Richardson · Tumey v. State of Ohio · Payne v. Arkansas
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e are hard pressed to think of anything more damning to an accused than information that a jury had previously convicted him for the crime charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the defendant had been convicted by another jury for the same murder but was being retried because his earlier conviction had been reversed on procedural grounds,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“even though the evidence of guilt was great and the defense of insanity tenuous,”
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.