State v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably State v. Gaines (1997), State v. Braxton (2000)
79 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Bruton v. United States · Giglio v. United States · Caldwell v. Mississippi · McKoy v. North Carolina
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the length of the delay, (2) the reason for the delay, (3) the defendant's assertion of [the] right to a speedy trial, and (4) prejudice resulting from the delay.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“We also cannot say that the question as to whether the jurors thought the death penalty was “necessary” conveyed to the jury the impression that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. The question does not imply why the death penalty is necessary and the members of the jury might have different reasons for thinking it is necessary. We cannot speculate as to what each juror felt was the reason for the necessity or the lack of necessity for the death penalty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Taylor“Assuming it was error to sustain the objections to this testimony by defendant Willis and that it was error for the court to hold that it could not find Willis was a member of a cognizable minority, we cannot hold this was prejudicial error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.