Fox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 94 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably 667 So. 2d 1242 - Ballenger v. State (1995), Pierce v. Gilchrist (2004)
2 federal appellate · 94 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 · Edwards v. Arizona · Gregg v. Georgia · Rhode Island v. Innis · Lockett v. Ohio
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Mitigating circumstances are those which, in fairness and mercy, may be considered as extenuating or reducing the degree of moral culpability or blame. The determination of what are mitigating circumstances is for you as jurors to resolve under the facts and circumstances of this case.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“group in the community; (2) the representation of this group in venires is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; (3) this underrepresentation is caused by systematic exclusion of that group in the jury selection process. The Supreme Court has never defined the term”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State · Bryson v. State“"... the existence of a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hawkins v. State · Clayton 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.