Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 933 F.2d 536 - Lee v. McCaughtry

Lee v. McCaughtry’s Empirical Analysis

933 F.2d 536 · 1991

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently August 2021

11 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

1601991200020102020decided

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 Teague v. Lane · Chambers v. Mississippi · Stone v. Powell · McCleskey v. Zant · Kuhlmann v. Wilson

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

  1. ““How reliable must hearsay be to fit the Chambers approach? We concluded in Rivera v. Director, Department of Corrections, 915 F.2d 280, 282 (7th Cir. 1990), that if a confession is sturdy enough for the state to use in its own case — if it is the sort of evidence that prosecutors regularly use against defendants — then defendants are entitled to use it for their own purposes.” (Emphasis in original.) Lee, 933 F.2d at 537 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[o]nce a state has brought its rules of evidence into line with constitutional norms, there is little point in case-by-case federal review of evidentiary rulings.... The federal interest lies in ensuring that states conduct their criminal process in a way likely to separate the guilty from the innocent, ... not in second-guessing every evidentiary ruling.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Chambers did not do away with the hearsay rule. The Supreme Court contemplated that the judge would be a gatekeeper, that unreliable statements could be excluded.”
    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.