458 So. 2d 1235 - State v. Welcome’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably 775 So. 2d 1022 - State v. Casey (2000), State v. Brogdon (1984)
2 federal appellate · 55 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 Chapman v. State of California · Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Furman v. Georgia · Solem v. Helm
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A trial judge's refusal to excuse a prospective juror for cause is not an abuse of discretion, notwithstanding that the juror has voiced an opinion seemingly prejudicial to the defense, where subsequently, on further inquiry or instruction, [the juror] has demonstrated a willingness and ability to decide the case impartially according to the law and the evidence.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(2) The juror is not impartial, whatever the cause of his partiality. An opinion or impression as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant shall not of itself be sufficient ground of challenge to a juror, if he declares, and the court is satisfied, that he can render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence; (3) The relationship whether, by blood, marriage, employment, friendship, or enmity between the juror and the defendant, the person injured by the offense, the district attorney, or defense counsel, is such that it is reasonable to conclude that it would influence the juror in arriving at a verdict; (4) The juror will not accept the law as given to him by the court;”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The offender was engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated burglary. (2) The offender knowingly created a risk of death or great bodily harm to more than one person. (3) The offense was committed in an especially heinous, atrocious or cruel manner in that the victim was subjected to torture, serious physical abuse, or pitiless infliction of unnecessary pain and suffering.”
3 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.