Calhoun v. Maryland’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2003 · most notably Hunt v. State (1990), Conyers v. State (1999)
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 49 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 · Myers v. United States · Huffington v. Maryland · State v. Calhoun
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Section III, each of you must determine for yourself whether any mitigating circumstance exists in this case. For the purpose of this sentencing proceeding, a mitigating circumstance is anything about the defendant or about the facts of this case that in fairness or in mercy may make the death sentence an inappropriate penalty for this defendant. * * * As you can see on the forms, the findings recorded in Section III need not be unanimous. Before recording your findings, however, you must deliberate on every issue for a reasonable period of time. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but do so only after an impartial consideration of the evidence with your fellow jurors. In determining whether any mitigating circumstance exists, consider all the evidence presented regardless of who introduced it. A mitigating circumstance must be proven, but need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. A mitigating circumstance need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. To prove by a preponderance of the evidence means to prove that something is more likely so than not so. As you will note in the form, in determining whether mitigating circumstances exist by a preponderance of the evidence, you must consider the mitigating circumstances that are referred to on the form.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Conyers v. State
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.