Stanley v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis
697 F.2d 955 · 1983
Citation profile
74 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 162 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Burger v. Kemp (1987), Withrow v. Williams (1993)
74 federal appellate · 31 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 · Gregg v. Georgia · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Furman v. Georgia · McMann v. Richardson
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 162 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“counsel may make a reasonable strategic judgment to present less than all possible available evidence in mitigation.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the time at which for many defendants the most important services of the entire proceeding can be performed.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"These cases establish that, subject only to the loose evidentiary requirement of relevance, capital defendants have a right to offer any evidence they choose on character or record or circumstances of the offense. Further, a death penalty scheme must allow the sentencing authority to consider and give independent weight to mitigating factors in addition to those listed in the death penalty statute. The cases thus create an asymmetry weighed on the side of mercy: while a sentencing authority may consider only those aggravating circumstances listed in the relevant statute, Proffitt v. Wainwright , 685 F.2d 1227 , 1266-70 (11th Cir. 1982), it may consider any mitigating factors that it wishes." Stanley v. Zant , 697 F.2d 955 , 960 (11th Cir. 1983) (emphasis in original).”
2 later decisions 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.