Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2017 · most notably Dowthitt v. State (1996), Madden v. State (1990)
67 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 Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · Katz v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar 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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When a case is called for trial and the parties have announced ready for trial, the names of those summoned as jurors in the case shall be called. Those not present may be fined not exceeding fifty dollars. An attachment may issue on request of either party for any absent summoned juror, to have him brought forthwith before the court. A person who is summoned but not present, may upon an appearance, before the jury is qualified, be tried as to his qualifications and impaneled as a juror unless challenged, but no cause shall be unreasonably delayed on account of his absence.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Custard v. State · Coleman v. State“Simply put, any actual expectation of privacy the appellant may have manifested in the stolen vehicle is not “one society is willing to recognize as ‘reasonable.’ ” ... We are convinced that the stare decisis of this Court is applicable in the case sub judice and appellant lacked standing to contest the search and seizure of the stolen vehicle which he gained possession of only by reason of his criminal conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Patel v. State“If a photograph is competent, material and relevant to the issue on trial, it is not rendered inadmissible merely because it is gruesome or might tend to arouse the passions of the jury, unless it is offered solely to inflame the minds of the jury. If a verbal description of the body ... would be admissible, a photograph depicting the same is admissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Samuels v. State
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.