441 So. 2d 84 - Edwards v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 87 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 99 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2017 · most notably Clemons v. Mississippi (1990), 451 So. 2d 743 - Neal v. State (1984)
4 federal appellate · 87 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 Gregg v. Georgia · Jurek v. Texas · Godfrey v. Georgia · Roberts v. Louisiana · 283 So. 2d 1 - State v. Dixon
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 99 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he evidence in this case is overwhelming, if indeed not without contradiction, that Edwards has a long history of suffering from the mental disease schizophrenia of a paranoid type.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Again, we feel that the meaning of such terms is a matter of common knowledge, so that an ordinary man would not have to guess at what was intended. It is our interpretation that heinous means extremely wicked or shockingly evil; that atrocious means outrageously wicked and vile; and, that cruel means designed to inflict a high degree of pain with utter indifference to, or even enjoyment of, the suffering of others. What is intended to be included are those capital crimes where the actual commission of the capital felony was accompanied by such additional acts as to set the crime apart from the norm of capital felonies the conscienceless or pitiless crime which is unnecessarily torturous to the victim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Clemons v. State · Jordan v. State“[t]here is a presumption that an accused is sane and, therefore, the burden is initially on the accused to introduce evidence creating a reasonable doubt as to his sanity at the time of the act. However, once the accused has overcome this initial burden, it is the burden of the State to present sufficient evidence to prove the accused's sanity beyond a reasonable doubt.”
2 later decisions 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.