Chambers v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
87 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 94 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2006 · most notably Adams v. Texas (1980), Sharp v. State (1986)
87 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 · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Gregg v. Georgia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Furman v. Georgia
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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) On conclusion of the presentation of the evidence, the court shall submit the following three issues to the jury: (1) whether the conduct of the defendant that caused the death of the deceased was committed deliberately and with the reasonable expectation that the death of the deceased or another would result; (2) whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society; and....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Milton v. State · Joiner v. State“[v]oir dire examination could take an unreasonable length of time if attorneys on both sides selected different words throughout a contemplated charge and asked each prospective juror what those words meant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““THE COURT: Now, Mr. Gomez, again I am not criticizing you. You told us two different things. You told the District Attorney you couldn’t conceive of a murder case where you felt like five years punishment was in order; do you recall saying that? “A. Yes, Ido. “THE COURT: Now, you told the defense attorney you could conceive of one where you felt five years would be in order; which is it please? “A. If I can say something. He said to think of a certain case. What if it’s self-defense? “THE COURT: If it’s self-defense, you wouldn’t find the man guilty. “A. They could have been fighting or something. “THE COURT: Again, I will ask you as everybody else has, and we are entitled to know whether you could consider the full range of punishment for the offense of murder which starts at a low of five years and goes on up to a possible ninety-nine years or life. That’s the range of punishment. Is that understood, Mr. Gomez? “A. Yes, sir. “THE COURT: Well, could you conceive of a case, I’ll ask you again, where your conscience would permit you to consider five years as punishment for murder? “A. No. “THE COURT: All right. You are disqualified. You will be excused. You are excused, sir. “[DEFENSE ATTORNEY]: For the record, may we have an objection to that, Your Honor. “THE COURT: Sure.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hernandez v. State
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.