Christopher Bibbins v. Stephen Dalsheim, Superintendent of Downstate Correctional Facility

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that information was not prejudicial, because it was cumulative and not relevant to any critical issue
• noting that when an extraneous influence is shown, a court must use an objective test to assess the likelihood that the influence would affect the typical juror
• noting that when an extraneous influence is shown, a court must use an objective test to assess the likelihood that the influence would affect the typical juror
• concluding that the petitioner was entitled to relief on his claim that the jury considered extra-record information in reaching its verdict only if the petitioner demonstrated that the error had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict
• juror's affidavit as to how extrinsic information affected the thinking and voting of the jurors or the deliberations of the jury as a whole was inadmissible
• juror’s affidavit as to how extrinsic information affected the thinking and voting of the jurors or the deliberations of the jury as a whole was inadmissible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).