Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 Ariz. 133 - State v. Coey

State v. Coey’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
November 2001
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently November 2001 · most notably State v. Schantz (1965), State v. Mincey (1981)

2 federal appellate · 56 state decisions

320195719601970198019902000decided

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 Burgunder v. State of Arizona · State v. Eisenstein · State v. Lamm · State v. Jordan · State v. Voeckell

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

  1. ““ * * * where the jury has discretion to fix the penalty at either death or life imprisonment, it is proper for the jury to consider the probability that the defendant will actually serve the penalty should they determine the sentence to be life imprisonment.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The rule is well settled in this jurisdiction that in cases of this kind the testimony of a lay witness who has had an opportunity to observe the past conduct and history of a defendant is as admissible on the issue of whether he was legally insane at -the time he committed the criminal act as that of a medical witness. * * * The fact that he is a lay witness goes not to the admissibility of the testimony but rather to its weight. Therefore, the only foundation which need be weighed to qualify such lay witness to testify on this issue is that he has had an opportunity to observe.the defendant, as provided in this rule.””
    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.