Mayberry v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2018 · most notably Swidler & Berlin v. United States (1998), Hicks v. State (1997)
60 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Edwards v. Arizona · Oregon v. Bradshaw · Kansas Gas & Electric Co. v. Brock, Secretary of Labor, Et Al. · Sireci v. Florida
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[flor this aggravating cireum-stance to justify in part an enhanced sentence, it must be understood to mean that the defendant is in need of correctional and rehabilitative treatment that can best be provided by a period of incarceration in a penal facility in excess of the presumptive sentence term.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Berry v. State · Simmons v. State“defendant was in need of correctional and rehabilitative treatment that could best be provided in a penal facility”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Kirby v. State · Castor v. State“iJmpo-sition of a reduced sentence would depreciate the seriousness of the crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Newhart v. State · Taylor 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.