Whittlesey v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 103 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Wiggins v. Smith, Warden (2003), Texas v. Cobb (2001)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 103 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 · Blockburger v. United States · North Carolina v. Pearce · Burks v. United States · Witherspoon v. Illinois
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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is [the trial judge] who is best equipped to decide the extent to which security measures should be adopted to prevent disruption of the trial, harm to those in the courtroom, escape of the accused, and the prevention of other crimes.... As a discretionary matter, the district judge’s decision with regard to measure[s] for security is subject to a limited review to determine if it was abused. We stress that the discretion is that of the district judge. He may not ... delegate that discretion to the Marshal.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““When a criminal defendant raises a Batson claim, the trial judge must follow a three-step process. The burden is initially upon the defendant to make a prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination [step one]. If the requisite showing has been made, ‘the burden shifts to the State to come forward with a neutral explanation for challenging black jurors [step two].’ ‘Finally, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has carried his burden of proving purposeful discrimination [step three].’ “”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the opportunity to consider `any aspect of a defendant's character or record . . . that the defendant proffers as a basis for a sentence less than death.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.