State v. Coleman’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 136 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 150 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably State v. Hancock (2006), State v. Yarbrough (2002)
5 federal appellate · 136 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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Batson v. Kentucky · State v. Jenks · State v. Bradley
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 150 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Any allegations of ineffectiveness based on facts not appearing in the record should be reviewed through the postconviction remedies of R.C. 2953.21.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“below an objective standard of reasonable representation,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The admission of the underlying facts regarding the three separate drug sales tended to prove the essential elements of the specification. R.C. 2929.04(A)(8) requires that the state prove motive, and evidence was introduced to demonstrate that [the defendant] was the key witness against appellant and that her murder would hinder the state’s case against him by preventing her testimony, which explained appellant’s motive and deep obsession with killing Stevens. Thus, the drug sales are not considered “other acts” evidence limited by Evid. R. 404(B); rather, they were introduced to prove the R.C. 2929.04(A)(8) death-penalty specification.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.