State v. Stokes’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
368 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 373 later decisions — most recently February 2012 · most notably State v. McCollum (1993), State v. Rose (1994)
368 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 Vandygriff v. Phillips · Enmund v. Florida · Pulley v. Harris · Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Weintraub
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 373 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“all cases arising since the effective date of our capital punishment statute, 1 June 1977, which have been tried as capital cases and reviewed on direct appeal by this Court and in which the jury recommended death or life imprisonment or in which the trial court imposed life imprisonment after the jury’s failure to agree upon a sentencing recommendation within a reasonable period of time.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Basden · State v. Davis“If, after making such a comparison, we find that juries have consistently been returning death sentences in the similar cases, then we will have a strong basis for concluding that a death sentence in the case under review is not excessive or disproportionate. On the other hand if we find that juries have consistently been returning life sentences in the similar cases, we will have a strong basis for concluding that a death sentence in the case under review is excessive or disproportionate.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Daniels · State v. Bacon“[I]t is imperative that defendant decide at trial whether he wants the statements] admitted or not. It is a tactical decision that can only be made by defendant, not the court. A defendant may not, for tactical reasons, fail to object at trial to evidence he hopes will help him and later on appeal assign admission of that evidence as error when in light of the jury’s verdict the evidence was not helpful, or was even hurtful, to defendant. The waiver rule was designed precisely to prevent this kind of second-guessing of the probable impact of evidence on the jury by parties who lose at the trial level. Defendant made his tactical decision to let the evidence come in at trial without objection. He may not now be heard to complain.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sexton · State v. Brown
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.