Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 583 SO2D 276 - Henderson v. State

Henderson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

94
cited by 94 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 89 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 94 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018 · most notably Morgan v. Illinois (1992), Dill v. State (1991)

2 federal appellate · 89 state decisions

590199020002010decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Giglio v. United States · Irvin v. Dowd · Carnegie v. United States

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.

  1. “In judging a prosecutor's closing argument, the standard is whether the argument `so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.'”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]n reviewing allegedly improper prosecutorial comments, conduct, and questioning of witnesses, the task of this Court is to consider their impact in the context of the particular trial, and not to view the allegedly improper acts in the abstract.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Whenever a victim is unable to attend such trial or hearing or any portion thereof by reason of death; disability; hardship, incapacity; physical, mental, or emotional condition; age; or other inability, the victim, the victim's guardian or the victim's family may select a representative who shall be entitled to exercise any right granted to the victim, pursuant to the provisions of this article."”
    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.