Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 713 P2D 1032 - Green v. State

Green v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
April 2009
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2009 · most notably Cartwright v. Maynard (1987), McDougall v. North Carolina (1986)

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 50 state decisions

270198519902000decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Marion · Eddings v. Oklahoma · United States v. Lovasco · Jurek v. Texas

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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “What is intended [is] the conscienceless or pitiless crime which is unnecessarily torturous to the victim.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The defendant was previously convicted of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person;”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he aggravating factors of being under sentence of imprisonment and being previously convicted of a felony involving violence do not cover the same aspect of the defendant's criminal history. The defendant could be under sentence of imprisonment without having been convicted of a felony involving violence. Also, a defendant could be convicted of a felony involving violence without being under a sentence of imprisonment. These aggravating circumstances are separate, and including the two factors in the weighing process does not constitute a doubling of the aggravating circumstances.”
    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.