Tillis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

cited by 88 later decisions

states following

September 1994

most recently cited

88 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently September 1994 · most notably Beecher v. State (1975), 512 So. 2d 1370 - Ex Parte Lawley (1987)

88 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 Pate v. Robinson · Seibold v. State · Cox v. State · Lee v. Alabama · Burns 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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“To the extent the above cited cases conflicted with this holding, they were overruled.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Posey v. State · Ex Parte Lankford
““. . . The remark could have possibly been interpreted by defendant as a comment on his failure to take the stand in his own behalf or his lack of material evidence. In an appropriate context this is highly prejudicial and would require reversal. But, here the trial court sustained the objection and immediately admonished the jury not to consider the remark. In view of the indirect thrust of the remark and the prompt action of the trial judge, the remark was rendered ‘innocuous.’ ” (Citations omitted.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 342 So. 2d 466 - Smith v. State · 370 So. 2d 736 - Whitt v. State
“". . . In actuality, § 428 itself is not directed to the competency of the defendant to stand trial, but whether he should be transferred from jail to a state hospital for treatment. Lee v. Alabama , 386 F.2d 97 (5th Cir., 1967). This is a humanitarian consideration which has nothing to do with due process per se. . . ."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Knowles v. State · 429 So. 2d 1146 - Hopkins 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.