Lamb v. Jernigan’s Empirical Analysis
683 F.2d 1332 · 1982
Citation profile
94 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 146 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2023 · most notably Rose v. Clark (1986), Francis v. Franklin (1985)
94 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Sandstrom v. Montana · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Cupp v. Naughten
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 146 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) A person commits the offense of murder when he unlawfully and with malice aforethought, either express or implied, causes the death of another human being. (b) Express malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take the life of another human being which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof. Malice shall be implied where no considerable provocation appears, and where all the circumstances of the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the question is not whether the trial court failed to isolate and cure a particular ailing instruction, but rather whether the ailing instruction by itself so infected the entire trial that the resulting conviction violates due process.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Corn v. Zant · Francis v. Franklin“Now, criminal intent, being an essential element of every crime, is a question of fact to be determined by you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, whether such intent existed in the mind of this defendant at the time of the alleged crime. Intent may be shown in many ways, provided you find that it existed from the evidence produced before you during the trial of this case. It may be inferred, ladies and gentlemen, from proven circumstances or by the acts and conduct of the defendant or it may be presumed when it would be the natural and necessary consequences of the particular acts. Stated simply in laymans language, ladies and gentlemen, criminal intent means simply the intent to commit an act which the laws of the State of Georgia prohibit and forbid.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Tucker v. Francis · Brooks v. Kemp
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.