Young v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2007 · most notably Godfrey v. Georgia (1980), Brock v. Texas (1977)
6 federal appellate · 53 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 Gregg v. Georgia · Irvin v. Dowd · Taylor v. Louisiana · Sam Destefano v. Woods, Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois. Frank Anthony Carceran · Daniel v. Louisiana
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In reviewing the death penalty in this case, we have considered the cases appealed to this court since January 1, 1970, in which a death or life sentence was imposed, and we find the similar cases listed in the Appendix support affirmance of the death penalty. “Judgment affirmed. “All the Justices concur. “APPENDIX “Moore v. State, 233 Ga. 861 , 213 S.E.2d 829 (1974); Floyd v. State, 233 Ga. 280 , 210 S.E.2d 810 (1974); Berryhill v. State, 235 Ga. 549 , 221 S.E.2d 185 (1975); Coleman v. State, 237 Ga. 84 , 226 S.E.2d 911 (1976); Birt v. State, 236 Ga. 815 , 225 S.E.2d 248 (1976); Gibson v. State, 236 Ga. 874 , 226 S.E.2d 63 (1976); Isaacs v. State, 237 Ga. 105 , 226 S.E.2d 922 (1976); Dungee v. State, 237 Ga. 218 , 227 S.E.2d 746 (1976); Pryor v. State, 238 Ga. 698 , 234 S.E.2d 918 (1977); Gaddis v. State, 239 Ga. 238 , 236 S.E.2d 594 (1977); Young v. State, 239 Ga. 53 , 236 S.E.2d 1 (1977).””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. White“does not prevent the verdict from being unanimous. The requirement is that a juror agree to a verdict. In this case, the juror on two occasions answered affirmatively that the verdict was his in the jury room and still his upon being polled. [Cits.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hanson 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.