State v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably 802 So. 2d 1224 - State v. Deruise (2001), 768 So. 2d 542 - State v. Hoffman (2000)
2 federal appellate · 26 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 Zant v. Stephens · Pulley v. Harris · Maynard v. Cartwright · 448 So. 2d 676 - State v. Captville · Monroe v. Louisiana
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one statutory aggravating circumstance exists and, after consideration of any mitigating circumstances, determines that the sentence of death should be imposed. The court shall instruct the jury concerning all of the statutory mitigating circumstances. The court shall also instruct the jury concerning the statutory aggravating circumstances but may decline to instruct the jury on any aggravating circumstance not supported by evidence. The court may provide the jury with a list of the mitigating and aggravating circumstances upon which the jury was instructed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In cases where the prosecutor simply emphasized that the state's evidence was unrebutted, and there were witnesses other than the defendant who could have testified on behalf of the defense but did not do so, we have held that the prosecutor's argument did not constitute an indirect reference to the defendant's failure to take the stand ... On the other hand, where the defendant is the only witness who could have rebutted the state's evidence, "a reference to the testimony as uncontroverted focuses the jury's attention on the defendant's failure to testify" and mandates a mistrial ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the jury was unaware of the narrow construction to be given the `especially heinous' aggravating circumstance [does] not result in any prejudice to defendant's substantial rights or deprive him of a reliable sentencing determination,”
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.