Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 727 F.2d 643 - Owen v. Duckworth

Owen v. Duckworth’s Empirical Analysis

727 F.2d 643 · 1984

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
8
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably United States v. Williams (1984), Abell v. Potomac Insurance (1988)

42 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

4201984199020002010decided

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. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Smith v. Phillips · Remmer v. United States · Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart

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

  1. “[rjather than question the jurors directly, a district court must make findings of fact at two separate levels. First, the district court must find the basic, or subsidiary, facts — e.g., the nature, content, and extent of the extra-judicial contact. Based on its findings of subsidiary facts, the district court must then make the ultimate factual determination: whether the contact likely affected the juror’s impartiality.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'the burden rests heavily upon the Government to establish ... that such contact with the juror was harmless to the defendant.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We review the district court's findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard. However, because the ultimate factual determination of impartiality depends on inferences of effect drawn from the subsidiary facts, we believe a more critical review of the district court's ultimate finding of fact is appropriate in this context than in other situations.”
    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.