Vargas v. Keane’s Empirical Analysis
86 F.3d 1273 · 1996
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), Beverly v. Walker (1997)
18 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Coleman v. Thompson · Wainwright v. Sykes · Holland v. United States · Sullivan v. Louisiana
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the charge as a whole, and assess whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the instructions to allow conviction based on proof insufficient to meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“doubt for which you can give a reason if called upon to do so by a fellow juror in the jury room.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Humphrey v. Cain · Humphrey v. Cain“A reasonable doubt is a doubt which is something more than a guess or a surmise. It’s not a conjecture or a fanciful doubt. A reasonable doubt is not a doubt which is raised by someone simply for the sake of raising doubts. Nor is it a doubt suggested by the ingenuity of counsel or any of the jurors, which is not justified by the evidence or lack of evidence. A reasonable doubt is a doubt based on reason, and not on the mere possibility of innocence. It’s a doubt for which you can, in your own mind, conscientiously give a reason. A reasonable doubt, in other words, is a real doubt, an honest doubt, a doubt which has its foundation in the evidence or lack of evidence. It’s the kind of doubt which, in the serious affairs which concern you in everyday life, you would pay heed and attention to. It’s the kind of doubt which would make a reasonable person hesitate to act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.