State v. Koedatich’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 255 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 269 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2020 · most notably State v. Cowans (1999), State v. Marshall (1991)
6 federal appellate · 255 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Chambers v. Mississippi · Furman v. Georgia · Irvin v. Dowd
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 269 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a rational tendency to engender a reasonable doubt with respect to an essential feature of the State's case.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[W]e recognize the need for greater guidance for prosecutors as they attempt to perform their constitutional duty of enforcing this statute. Other death penalty jurisdictions have held the validity of the prosecutor’s exercise of discretion depends solely on whether a factual basis exists for the charging of aggravating factors. * * * Nevertheless, we believe there is a need to promote uniformity in the administration of the death penalty, which will be an additional safeguard against arbitrariness and an assistance to this Court in its developing proportionality review. Accordingly, we strongly recommend that the Attorney General, and the various County Prosecutors, in consultation with the Public Defender, adopt guidelines for use throughout the state by prosecutors in determining the selection of capital cases. [Id. at 258, 548 A.2d 939 (citations omitted).]”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Kiett · State v. Perry“between cases in which the trial atmosphere is so corrupted by publicity that prejudice may be presumed, and cases in which pretrial publicity, while extensive, is less intrusive, making the determinative issue the actual effect of the publicity on the impartiality of the jury panel.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Mejia · State v. Nelson
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.