Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 667 SW2D 671 - Ice v. Commonwealth

Ice v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Smith v. Murray (1986), Sawyer v. Smith (1990)

5 federal appellate · 73 state decisions

2601984199020002010decided

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 Gregg v. Georgia · Griffin v. California · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Irvin v. Dowd · Sheppard v. Maxwell

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

  1. “[I]n a death penalty case every prejudicial error must be considered, whether or not an objection was made in the trial court”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the message [is] that the jurors' awesome responsibility is lessened by the fact that their decision is not the final one.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"[T]he question of whether objection was made at the trial level is only significant where it may reasonably be inferred that appellant intentionally failed to object for reasons of trial tactics." Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671, 674 (1984).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.