Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 Wash. 2d 1 - State v. Dodd

120 Wash. 2d 1 - State v. Dodd’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

84
cited by 84 later decisions
7
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 67 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Bonin v. Calderon (1995), 125 Wash. 2d 570 - State v. Gentry (1995)

11 federal appellate · 67 state decisions

450199220002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Gregg v. Georgia · Furman v. Georgia · Lockett v. Ohio · Eddings v. Oklahoma

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

  1. “[A] defendant sentenced to death will be able to forego a state appeal only if he has been judicially determined to have the capacity to understand the choice between life and death and to knowingly and intelligently waive any and all rights to appeal his sentence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he sentencing scheme must not allow the death penalty to be wantonly or freakishly imposed, it must direct and limit jury discretion, to minimize the risk of arbitrary or capricious action, and it must allow particularized consideration of relevant aspects of the character and record of each defendant, and the circumstances of the offense, before imposition of the sentence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “We do not weigh the aggravating factors against the mitigating factors the way the jury did; rather we consider the circumstances of the crime and any mitigating circumstances and determine whether a rational jury could have concluded that mitigating circumstances do not outweigh the circumstances of the crime.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.