Maddox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 2016
3 federal appellate · 13 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 Fogarty v. State · Smith v. State · State v. Gould · Tilton v. State · Groves 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If at any time it appears to the jury commissioners that the jury list so composed, is not a fairly representative cross-section of the intelligent and upright citizens of the county, they shall supplement such list by going out into the county and personally acquainting themselves with other citizens of the county, including intelligent and upright citizens of any significantly identifiable group in the county which may not be fairly representative thereon.” Ga. L. 1968, p. 533; 1973, pp. 484, 485 (Code Ann. § 59-106).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Zirkle v. State“In criminal cases the privilege of polling a jury is the legal right of the defendant, and does not depend upon the discretion of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Benefield 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.