Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 OHIOST3D 44 - State v. Davis

State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

130
cited by 130 later decisions
4
states following
August 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 126 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 130 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably State v. Gumm (1995), State v. Taylor (1997)

2 federal appellate · 126 state decisions

6101992200020102020decided

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 Lockett v. Ohio · Eddings v. Oklahoma · Skipper v. South Carolina · State v. Maurer · Hitchcock v. Dugger

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

  1. “In the case at bar, no relevant mitigating evidence was excluded from consideration by the panel during the mitigation phase of appellant’s 1984 trial. All mitigating evidence which was available at that time was duly received and considered by the panel including evidence concerning appellant’s ability to adjust to prison life. That same relevant evidence was again received and considered by the panel in 1989 for purposes of resentencing appellant. The evidence excluded from consideration by the panel at appellant’s resentencing hearing concerned certain post-trial matters. Under these circumstances, we do not believe that Skipper or, for that matter, Lockett, Eddings, or Hitchcock requires that appellant’s death sentence be vacated.”
    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.