Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 885 F.2d 1318 - Chambers v. Armontrout

Chambers v. Armontrout’s Empirical Analysis

885 F.2d 1318 · 1989

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
July 2000
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2000

13 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

140198919902000decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Darden v. Wainwright · Kimmelman v. Morrison · Burger v. Kemp · Delaware v. New York

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.

  1. “cooly” upon ... taking the life of Oestricker. The fact that Jones was in a position to observe the condition of the getaway car with running engine and the distance between the victim and petitioner at the time of the fatal shot would have made this trial strategy almost impossible from a practical standpoint. ****** Without Jones’ testimony a jury might believe, as at least one [Missouri] Supreme Court Judge did, that the whole matter was just”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “I agree that Mr. Hager need not subpoena or call James Jones at my trial. His cross examination at the first trial was extremely damaging to me and I believe it would be at the second trial. I have been admonished that by not calling James Jones it may not be possible to obtain a jury instruction on self defense. 4/13/85 /s/ James W. Chambers”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “There is a mystery as to why the evidence that the victim struck the defendant, knocking him to the ground, which was held to require a self-defense instruction in the first trial, was not offered in the second.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.