Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
107 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 110 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Livingston v. State (1987), Simpkins v. State (1979)
107 state decisions
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 Chapman v. State of California · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Dusky v. United States · Harrington v. California · Pate v. Robinson
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 110 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A person acts with criminal negligence, or is criminally negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor’s standpoint.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hunter v. State · Simpkins v. State“"To establish insanity at the present time, it must be established by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant does not, by reason of mental disease or defect, have sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and that he does not have a rational or factual understanding of the proceedings against him. In this regard, you are instructed that the term mental defect may include mental retardation."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Casey v. State · Baltierra v. State“"The question before us is whether an accused's loss of memory regarding the facts of the event for which he is charged, standing alone, renders him incompetent to stand trial as a matter of law. We find the question to be one of first impression for this Court, but find that there is a growing body of outside authority addressed to the question here presented. We find no case yet reported which has held that the inability to recall the event charged because of amnesia constitutes mental incapacity to stand trial. See Amnesia: A Case Study in the Limits of Particular Justice, 71 Yale L.J. 109 (1961, 1962); United States ex rel. Parson v. Anderson , 481 F.2d 94 (3rd Cir. 1973); United States v. Sullivan , 406 F.2d 180 (2nd Cir. 1969); United States v. Stevens , 461 F.2d 317 (7th Cir. 1972); State v. Ferguson , 26 Ariz. App. 285 , 547 P.2d 1085 (1976); Bradley v. Preston , 263 F. Supp. 283 (D.C.Colo. 1967), cert. den. 390 U.S. 990 , 88 S.Ct. 1188 , 19 L.Ed.2d 1296 ; United States v. Stubblefield , 325 F. Supp. 485 (D.C.Tenn. 1971); People v. Francabandera , 33 N.Y.2d 429 , 354 N.Y.S.2d 609 , 310 N.E.2d 292 (1974); State v. Severns , 184 Kan. 213 , 336 P.2d 447 (1959); State v. Swails , 223 La. 751 , 66 So.2d 796 (1953); . . ."”
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.