Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 407 SO2D 885 - Francois v. State

Francois v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
September 2008
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2008 · most notably Sochor v. Florida (1992), Rolling v. State (1997)

27 state decisions

230198119902000decided

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 United States v. Agurs · Lockett v. Ohio · Castaneda v. Partida · Patterson v. United States · Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Although the trial court's sentencing errors resulted in the recitation of three statutory aggravating circumstances that were not properly established by the evidence, we find that the sentences of death should still be upheld. Where the consideration of erroneous aggravating circumstances does not interfere with the weighing process prescribed by the statute because there are no mitigating circumstances to weigh, no resentencing is required.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a defendant must be allowed to present evidence pertaining to the degree of his or her involvement in and the circumstances of the events upon which the previous convictions are based.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “it would be a different case if the court had excluded evidence proffered by the defendant rebutting the state's evidence of aggravation or relative to any matter in mitigation.”
    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.