Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 463 U.S. 277 - Solem v. Helm

Solem v. Helm’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

6,325
cited by 6,325 later decisions
92
cited 92 times by the Supreme Court
48
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

1,733 federal appellate · 101 district · 3,316 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6,325 later decisions (92 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2026 · most notably Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman (1984), Rita v. United States (2007)

1,733 federal appellate · 101 district · 3,316 state decisions — followed in 48 states

1.8k019831990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedHelm v. Solem (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Morrissey v. Brewer · Gregg v. Georgia · Furman v. Georgia

Cited together with Rummel v. Estelle · Harmelin v. Michigan · Hutto v. Davis · Weems v. United States · United States v. Tucker

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 6,325 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
    220 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(i) the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; (ii) the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; and (iii) the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions.”
    130 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “In view of the substantial deference that must be accorded legislatures and sentencing courts, a reviewing court rarely will be required to engage in extended analysis to determine that a sentence is not constitutionally disproportionate.”
    59 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.