Buckingham v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2018 · most notably Ewing v. California (2003), State v. Mitchell (1987)
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Terry v. Ohio · Florida v. Royer · Adams v. Williams · United States v. Brignoni-Ponce · Dunaway v. New York
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“intended to reserve the habitual offender penalties for those individuals who were not rehabilitated after the specified number of separate encounters with the criminal justice system and a corresponding number of chances to reform.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ross v. State · State v. Livingston“some chance for rehabilitation after each sentencing, before the extreme penalty of life imprisonment be brought to bear.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ross v. State · State v. Livingston“initial detention was a lawful, limited intrusion reasonably justified under the circumstances”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Flowers 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.