Tichnell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 district · 358 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 369 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably Johnson v. State (1985), Oken v. State (1992)
4 district · 358 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 Jackson v. Virginia · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Gregg v. Georgia · Furman v. Georgia · Lockett v. Ohio
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 369 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he standard to apply is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.””
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f the killing results from a choice made as the result of thought, however short the struggle between the intention and the act, it is sufficient to characterize the crime as deliberate and premeditated murder.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"(i) Evidence relating to any mitigating circumstance listed in subsection (g); (ii) Evidence relating to any aggravating circumstance listed in subsection (d) of which the State had notified the defendant pursuant to § 412(b); (iii) Evidence of any prior criminal convictions, pleas of guilty or nolo contendere, or the absence of such prior convictions or pleas, to the same extent admissible in other sentencing procedures; (iv) Any presentence investigation report. However, any recommendation as to sentence contained in the report is not admissible; and (v) Any other evidence that the court deems of probative value and relevant to sentence, provided the defendant is accorded a fair opportunity to rebut any statements.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.