Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently January 2004 · most notably Kaczorowski v. Mayor of Baltimore (1987), Johnson v. State (1985)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 76 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 Furman v. Georgia · Eddings v. Oklahoma · Woodson v. North Carolina · Jurek v. Texas · Proffitt v. Florida
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(iv) Any presentence investigation report. However, any recommendation as to sentence contained in the report is not admissible; and”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Conyers v. State · Calhoun v. State“[t]he defendant has not previously (i) been found guilty of a crime of violence; (ii) entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of a crime of violence; or (iii) had a judgment of probation on stay of entry of judgment entered on a charge of a crime of violence.” The statute then goes on to define the term”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Conyers v. State · Conyers v. State“"Thus, § 413 (c) (1) (iii) establishes a more stringent standard of reliability for the admission of such evidence in a death penalty case than is applied in a nondeath penalty case. It precludes, in a death penalty case, any but the most reliable type of evidence of unrelated crimes — a conviction. Additionally, § 413 (c) (1) (iii) precludes, in a death penalty case, inflammatory detailed evidence of the underlying facts and circumstances surrounding unrelated crimes. As a result, § 413 (c) (1) (iii), like § 413 (c) (1) (i), serves the purpose of moderating the significantly prejudicial nature of evidence of unrelated crimes in the face of the unique severity of the death penalty.” 297 Md. at 247.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Conyers v. State · Calhoun 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.