Strickland v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 1981
19 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 Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati & Indianapolis Railway Co. v. Closser · Clem v. State · Harlan v. State · Baker v. State · Mullinix v. State
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The evidence upon this point [venue] is meager and unsatisfactory, but we do not feel justified in holding that the trial court might not infer, upon the whole evidence, that the transaction occurred in Gibson county.”
1 later decision 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.