Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 490 A.2d 158 - Bailey v. State

Bailey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
September 2009
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently September 2009

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions

130198419902000decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Zant v. Stephens · Pulley v. Harris · County of Los Angeles v. Chavez-Salido

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

  1. “You have already convicted the defendant of causing the death of two persons; therefore, that aggravating circumstance has been established beyond a reasonable doubt and you are so instructed.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The Supreme Court shall limit its review under this section to the recommendation on an imposition of the penalty of death and shall determine: a. Whether, considering the totality of evidence in aggravation and mitigation which bears upon the particular circumstances or details of the offense and the character and propensities of the offender, the death penalty was either arbitrarily or capriciously imposed or recommended, or disproportionate to the penalty recommended or imposed in similar cases arising under this section. b. Whether the evidence supports the jury’s or judge’s finding of a statutory aggravating circumstance as enumerated in subsection (e) of this section and, where applicable, § 636(a)(2)-7 of this title.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The cases cited by defendant relating to the unconstitutionality of conclusive presumptions are inapposite since they apply to trial situations and not after the verdict situations as here in a bifurcated penalty hearing.”
    2 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.