Mills v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2002 · most notably Foucha v. Louisiana (1992), 7 Cal. 3d 126 - In Re Franklin (1972)
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Crowell v. Benson · Baxstrom v. Herold · Scales v. United States · Lynch v. Overholser · Japanese Immigrant Case
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We hold that in adjusting the delicate balance between a society's right to be protected from potentially mental[ly] ill and dangerous individuals, on the one hand, and the individual's right to be protected from improvident confinement on the other, it was not a denial of due process to commit the appellant under § 4702 (a) by virtue of the presumption of continuing mental illness and the jury's verdict, without a separate hearing and determination as to present mental condition."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Jones · Chase v. Kearns““§ 403. Disposition of person found not guilty by reason of insanity. “ (1) Upon the rendition of a verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’, the Court shall, upon motion of the Attorney General, order that the person so acquitted shall forthwith be committed to the Delaware State Hospital. “(2) A person committed to the Delaware State Hospital in accordance with subsection (1) shall be kept there until the superior court of the county wherein the case was tried is satisfied that the public safety will not be' endangered by his release. The superior court shall without special motion reconsider the necessity of continued detention of a person thus committed after he has been detained for 1 year. It shall thereafter reconsider his detention upon motion on his behalf or whenever advised by the state hospital that the public safety will not be endangered by his release.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Garrett v. State“Equal protection of the laws does not require that all persons be dealt with identically; it does require that a distinction must have some relevance to the purpose for which the classification is made [and that] there is reasonable basis for the distinction made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Marine 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.