Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 463 U.S. 992 - California v. Ramos

California v. Ramos’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

1,559
cited by 1,559 later decisions
106
cited 106 times by the Supreme Court
37
states following
February 2025
most recently cited

315 federal appellate · 25 district · 815 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,559 later decisions (106 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Darden v. Wainwright (1986), Michigan v. Long (1983)

315 federal appellate · 25 district · 815 state decisions — followed in 37 states

586019831990200020102020decided

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 · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Furman v. Georgia · Lockett v. Ohio · Solem v. Helm

Cited together with Gregg v. Georgia · Zant v. Stephens · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Lockett v. Ohio · Woodson v. North Carolina

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 1,559 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the qualitative difference of death from all other punishments requires a correspondingly greater degree of scrutiny of the capital sentencing determination,”
    37 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[W]e believe that in capital cases the fundamental respect for humanity underlying the Eighth Amendment requires consideration of the character and record of the individual offender and the circumstances of the particular offense as a constitutionally indispensable part of the process of inflicting the penalty of death. This conclusion rests squarely on the predicate that the penalty of death is qualitatively different from a sentence of imprisonment, however long.... Because of that qualitative difference, there is a corresponding difference in the need for reliability in the determination that death is the appropriate punishment in a specific case.”
    34 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Once the jury finds that the defendant falls within the legislatively defined category of persons eligible for the death penalty,”
    23 later decisions 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.