Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 673 SW2D 1 - State v. Preston

State v. Preston’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

90
cited by 90 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018 · most notably Feltrop v. Missouri (1991), State v. Feltrop (1991)

11 federal appellate · 72 state decisions

4201984199020002010decided

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 · Pulley v. Harris · Godfrey v. Georgia · Commissioner v. Engle · Sullivan 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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In following the mandate of [ Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420 , 100 S.Ct. 1759 , 64 L.Ed.2d 398 (1980),] to establish "clear and objective standards" as to what types of murders constitute "depravity of mind," this Court, while not expressly adopting a precise formula, has noted the following factors to be considered in finding "depravity of mind": mental state of defendant, infliction of physical or psychological torture upon the victim as when victim has a substantial period of time before death to anticipate and reflect upon it; brutality of defendant's conduct; mutilation of the body after death; absence of any substantive motive; absence of defendant's remorse and the nature of the crime.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) Whether the murder of [each victim] was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture or depravity of mind; (2) Whether the murder of [each victim] was committed by the defendant for the purpose of preventing [each] from testifying in a judicial proceeding.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “depravity of mind ... outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman,”
    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.