403 So. 2d 371 - Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
September 2003
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Witherspoon v. Illinois · Relford v. Commandant, U. S. Disciplinary Barracks · Stroud v. United States · 322 So. 2d 908 - Tedder v. State · Stroud v. United States
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although the jury's role in the sentencing phase is an advisory one, it is significant to a defendant since a trial court may not impose the death penalty following a jury's advisory sentence of life imprisonment unless "the facts suggesting a sentence of death [are] so clear and convincing that virtually no reasonable person could differ." Tedder v. State, 322 So.2d 908, 910 (Fla. 1975). We have previously held that it was error for a trial judge to refuse to allow defense counsel to propound any voir dire inquiry as to the issue of mercy, since "[s]uch inquiry ... could conceivably be determinative of whether the defense should challenge a juror either for cause or peremptorily." Poole v. State, 194 So.2d 903, 905 (Fla. 1967) (emphasis supplied). The admitted refusal of juror Roberts to weigh mitigating circumstances in the sentencing phase presents a clear case in which a challenge for cause should have been granted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“fundamental violation ... [of] the express requirements in the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution and in article I, section 16, of the Florida Constitution, that an accused be tried by `an impartial jury'.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in any required sentencing phase under any circumstances. In so holding we noted that such bias against the defendant in the sentencing aspect of a capital case amounts to a”
1 later decision 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.