Tibbs v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2021
22 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Ake v. Oklahoma · Leary v. United States · Zant v. Stephens · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]lthough such a practice may be allowed by a trial judge, it is an extraordinary measure . . . Unless the danger of prejudicing the jurors by exposure to damaging information is a grave problem or some special purpose would be served, it is unlikely that individual voir dire would be justified. We find no abuse of discretion in not allowing the procedure.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hain v. State“this evidence may be direct or circumstantial and need not corroborate all of the material aspects of the crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wackerly v. State“include any expert which is `necessary for an adequate defense.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Green 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.