State v. Padilla’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2018
1 federal appellate · 16 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Furman v. Georgia · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Robinson v. State of California · Weems 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“imposition of multiple valid sentences to run consecutively does not, as such, constitute cruel and unusual punishment as contemplated by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ira v. Janecka“[W]hether multiple sentences for multiple offenses run concurrently or consecutively is a matter resting in the sound discretion of the trial court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rayhorn v. Shanks“the imposition of separate sentences to run consecutively is lawful and violates no federally protected right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ira v. Janecka
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.