Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 532 U.S. 36 - Shafer v. South Carolina

Shafer v. South Carolina’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

251
cited by 251 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

100 federal appellate · 3 district · 85 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 251 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2024 · most notably Kelly v. South Carolina (2002), 30 Cal. 4th 226 - People v. Prieto (2003)

100 federal appellate · 3 district · 85 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1610200120102020decided

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 Simmons v. South Carolina · Ramdass v. Angelone Director Virginia Department of Corrections · Yarbrough v. Commonwealth · State v. Starnes

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

  1. “a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death available to the jury is life imprisonment without possibility of parole, due process entitles the defendant `to inform the jury of [his] parole ineligibility, either by a jury instruction or in arguments by counsel. '”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “left no doubt about its failure to gain ... any clear understanding”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “'where a capital defendant's future dangerousness is at issue, and the only sentencing alternative to death available to the jury is life imprisonment without possibility of parole,' the Due Process Clause 'entitles the defendant to inform the jury of [his] parole ineligibility, either by a jury instruction or in arguments by counsel.'”
    4 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.