Marino v. Vasquez’s Empirical Analysis
812 F.2d 499 · 1987
Citation profile
137 federal appellate · 4 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 226 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably United States v. Hernandez-Escarsega (1989), 3550 Stevens Creek Associates v. Barclays Bank of California (1990)
137 federal appellate · 4 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 18 U.S.C. § 3142 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Picard v. Connor · Vandygriff v. Phillips · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · United States v. McConney
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 226 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A defendant is entitled to a new trial when the jury obtains or uses evidence that has not been introduced during trial if there is 'a reasonable possibility that the extrinsic material could have affected the verdict.'”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) whether the material was actually received, and if so, how; (2) the length of time it was available to the jury; (3) the extent to which the juror discussed and considered it; (4) whether the material was introduced before a verdict was reached, and if so at what point in the deliberations; and (5) any other matters which may bear on the issue of the reasonable possibility of whether the extrinsic material affected the verdict.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This court may affirm the district court on any ground finding support in the record, even if the district court relied on the wrong grounds or wrong reasoning.”
5 later decisions 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.