Capps v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
921 F.2d 260 · 1990
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Stephen Wayne Anderson v. Arthur Calderon, Warden (2000), Capps v. Sullivan (1993)
11 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
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 Strickland v. Washington · Teague v. Lane · Mathews v. United States · In re Disbarment of Adelman · United States v. Miller
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Id. at 263 . As we held in Capps, '[b]y playing a 'what if' game with jurors who voted to find him guilty, [Mr. Ross] actually is probing their mental process in their deliberations and using the results in an attempt to secure a new trial. This he cannot do under Rule 606(b).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have strictly construed Rule 606(b) to prohibit a juror from testifying to the effect of anything upon that juror's mind not within the specified exceptions to the rule [for extraneous prejudicial information and outside influence].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen a defendant takes the stand in his own behalf and admits all of the elements of the crime, exactly in accord with the court's instructions to the jury, it is surely inadequate legal representation to hope that the jury will ignore the court's instructions and acquit from sympathy, rather than to raise an entrapment defense that has some support in the evidence.”
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.