Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 809 F.2d 463 - Hamilton v. Nix

Hamilton v. Nix’s Empirical Analysis

809 F.2d 463 · 1987

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
2
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Newlon v. Armontrout (1989), Jon Keith Smith v. Michael Groose Missouri Attorney General (2000)

46 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

37019871990200020102020decided

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 · Chapman v. State of California · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Leon · Cuyler v. Sullivan

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

  1. “reasonable probability that the error complained of affected the outcome of the trial,”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “`so egregious that they fatally infected the proceedings and rendered his entire trial fundamentally unfair.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the challenged evidence is admissible if the causal connection between the constitutional violation and the discovery of the evidence is so attenuated as to rid the taint. Id. Under the”
    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.