Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 665 SW2D 87 - State v. Cone

State v. Cone’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2016 · most notably Bell Warden v. Cone (2002), Cone v. Bell (2009)

7 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

1801984199020002010decided

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 State v. Dicks · Houston v. State · State v. Pritchett · State v. Workman · State v. Austin

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

  1. “(2) The defendant was previously convicted of one or more felonies, other than the present charge, which involve the use or threat of violence to the person. (3) The defendant knowingly created a great risk of death to two or more persons, other than the victim murdered, during his act of murder. (5) The murder was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel in that it involved torture or depravity of mind. (6) The murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution of the defendant or another.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Given that the two other aggravating circumstances are fully supported by the record and that little evidence of any mitigating circumstances exists, ... in view of the nature and circumstances of this murder and considering defendant’s admissible record, after careful consideration we are of the opinion that if any error was committed by the jury, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in view of multiple aggravating circumstances which are clearly established.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[b]lood was spattered throughout the house,”
    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.