Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 501 P2D 891 - Gibson v. State

Gibson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 2015

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

6019721980199020002010decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Boulden v. Holman · Oxendine v. State · Tarter v. State · Koonce v. State

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

  1. “A challenge for implied bias may be taken for all or any of the following cases, and for no other: 8. If the offense charged be punishable with death, the entertaining of such conscientious opinions as would preclude his finding the defendant guilty of, in which case he shall neither be permitted nor compelled to serve as a juror.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Just as veniremen cannot be excluded for cause on the ground that they hold such views [i.e., “general objections to the death penalty or ... conscientious or religious scruples against its infliction”], so too they cannot be excluded for cause simply because they indicate that there are some kinds of cases in which they would refuse to recommend capital punishment. And a prospective juror cannot be expected to say in advance of trial whether he would in fact vote for the extreme penalty in the case before him. The most that can be demanded of a venireman in this regard is that he be willing to consider all of the penalties provided by state law, and that he not be irrevocably committed, before the trial has begun, to vote against the penalty of death regardless of the facts and circumstances that might emerge in the course of the proceedings.”
    1 later decision 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.