Short v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Bland v. State (2000), Williams v. State (2001)
8 federal appellate · 41 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 Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Lockett v. Ohio · United States v. Cronic · Hernandez v. New York
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“sufficient evidence to show this Court by clear and convincing evidence there is a strong possibility trial counsel was ineffective for failing to utilize or identify the complained-of evidence.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lott v. Trammell · Lott v. State“"A confession is not admissible under Oklahoma law unless it is supported by 'substantial independent evidence which would tend to establish [its] trustworthiness." [Citations omitted.] This standard does not require that each material element of the charged offenses be corroborated by facts independent of the confession, or that there be no inconsistencies whatsoever between the facts proven and the facts related in the confession."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The State has alleged that there exists a probability that the defendant will commit future acts of violence that constitute a continuing threat to society. This aggravating circumstance is not established unless the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that the defendant's behavior has demonstrated a threat to society; and Second, a probability that this threat will continue to exist in the future.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Bland v. State · Williams v. State
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.