Finney v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis
709 F.2d 643 · 1983
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably Martin v. Wainwright (1985), United States of America v. Mercedes Novaton Humberto Rodriguez
19 federal appellate · 11 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 Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Coker v. Georgia · United States Smith v. Baldi · Addington v. Texas · Hazra 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to the extent that a fair and just hearing would be thwarted by his absence, and to that extent only.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In this case the trial court ordered that Finney be evaluated by psychiatric experts at the Central State Hospital. These experts testified at the trial and were subjected to cross-examination by Finney’s attorneys. There is no indication in the record or assertion on appeal that defense counsel were denied access to the complete reports of the forensic team at the hospital. Finney’s sanity was put in issue by competent evidence, and defense counsel were not deprived of expert opinion on the question. This is sufficient.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although the charge authorized the jury to consider circumstances in extenuation or mitigation, * * * the court failed to explain what function such a consideration would play in sentencing deliberations. An authorization to consider mitigating circumstances is a hollow instruction when unaccompanied by an explanation informing the jury why the law allows such a consideration and what effect a finding of mitigating circumstances has on the ultimate recommendation of sentence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Tyler v. Kemp · State v. Lewis
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.