State v. Daniels’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 112 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably State v. Golphin (2000), State v. Grooms (2000)
6 federal appellate · 112 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 Donnelly v. DeChristoforo · Darden v. Wainwright · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Eddings v. Oklahoma · Penry v. Lynaugh
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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Billings v. Polk · Daniels v. Lee“Q. Do you think that the punishment that should be imposed for anyone in a criminal case in general should be effected [sic] by their mental or emotional state at the time that the crime was committed? Q. ... If you were instructed by the Court that certain things are mitigating, that is they are a basis for rendering or returning a verdict of life imprisonment as opposed to death and were those circumstances established you must give them some weight or consideration, could you do that? Q. Mr. Lawrence, in this case if there was evidence to support, evidence to show that the defendant was under the influence of a mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the commission of the murder and if the Court instructed you that was a mitigating circumstance, if proven, that must be given some weight, could you follow that instruction? Q. ... If the Court advises you that by the preponderance of the evidence that if you are shown that the capability of the defendant to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired at the time of the murder, and the Court instructed you that was a circumstance to which you must give some consideration, could you follow that instruction? Q. Do you believe that a psychologist or a psychiatrist can be successful in treating people with mental or emotional disturbance [s]? Q. Do you personally believe, and I am talking about your personal beliefs, that if by the preponderance of evidence, that is evidence that is established, that a ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Simpson“Next, consider whether the murder was actually committed by another person, and the defendant was only an accomplice in the murder and his participation in the murder was relatively minor. The distinguishing feature of an accomplice or accessory is that he is not the person who actually committed the murder. You would find this mitigating circumstance if you find that the victim was killed by another person and that the defendant was only an accessory to the killing and that the defendant’s conduct constitutes relatively minor participation in the murder. If one or more of you finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the circumstance exists, you would write yes. If none of you find the circumstance exists, you would write no in the space.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Brewington
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.