Suniga v. Rj Bunnell’s Empirical Analysis
998 F.2d 664 · 1993
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently April 2013 · most notably William Lee Shackleford v. Susan Hubbard, Warden (2000), Commonwealth v. Berry (1995)
37 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on United States v. Olano · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Burks v. United States · Estelle v. McGuire · Sandstrom v. Montana
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Neither can we, as the state suggests, base a harmless-error determination on the seemingly overwhelming weight of the evidence pointing to the petitioner’s guilt of ... murder. Where two theories of culpability are submitted to the jury, one correct and the other incorrect, it is impossible to tell which theory of culpability the jury followed in reaching a general verdict. Here too, it is impossible to know what the jury (or some juror) did. Here, too, the writ should issue.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the instruction by itself ... infected the entire trial,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“: He went on to state that the case is not amenable to harmless error analysis. Id. I quote his powerful language: 20 The state trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the theory of felony-murder. We have determined that its error was so serious that the 'instruction by itself so infected the entire trial that the resulting conviction violates due process.”
2 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.