Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 498 U.S. 1111 - Jells v. Ohio

Jells v. Ohio’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2017 · most notably Enlow v. Tishomingo County (1992), Haliym v. Mitchell (2007)

19 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

170199120002010decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · Johnson v. Zerbst · Brady v. United States · Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois

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

  1. “'[O]ne of the most important functions any jury can perform in making ... a selection (between life imprisonment and death for a defendant convicted in a capital case) is to maintain a link between contemporary community values and the penal system.' " ( Gregg v. Georgia (1976) 428 U.S. 153 , 181, 96 S.Ct. 2909 , 49 L.Ed.2d 859 .) The federal Constitution imposes a "special ' "need for reliability in the determination that death is the appropriate punishment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[t]here is no requirement for a trial court to interrogate a defendant in order to determine whether he or she is fully apprised of the right to a jury trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[t]he decision to waive the right to jury sentencing may deprive a capital defendant of potentially life-saving advantages.”
    1 later decision 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.