Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 819 P2D 1362 - Lafevers v. State

Lafevers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
April 2012
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2012

16 state decisions

140199120002010decided

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 Ake v. Oklahoma · Richardson v. Marsh · Woodson v. North Carolina · Zant v. Stephens · Enmund v. Florida

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

  1. “it is not enough that the defenses of the co-defendants are inconsistent, in conflict or are otherwise unreconcilable. To be considered `mutually antagonistic,' the two theories of defense must be in direct contravention and the parties must each place blame with the co-defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “whatever the charge against the defendant.”
    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.