Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 856 A2D 539 - Ploof v. State

Ploof v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3591 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3593 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Batson v. Kentucky · Gregg v. Georgia · Ring v. Arizona

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

  1. “The Supreme Court shall limit its review under this section to the recommendation on and imposition of the penalty of death and shall determine: a. Whether, considering the totality of evidence in aggravation and mitigation which bears upon the particular circumstances or details of the offense and the character and propensities of the offender, the death penalty was either arbitrarily or capriciously imposed or recommended, or disproportionate to the penalty recommended or imposed in similar cases arising under this section. b. Whether the evidence supports the jury’s or the judge's finding of a statutory aggravating circumstance as enumerated in subsection (e) of this section and, where applicable, § 636(a)(2)-(7) of this title.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[Ploofs] statement was not ambiguous and, therefore, the police were not required to seek further clarification of his intent before proceeding to question him.”). 22 . United States v. Fouche, 776 F.2d 1398, 1405 (9th Cir.1985). 23 . Davis, 512 U.S. at 462 , 114 S.Ct. 2350 (first of two statements). See also United States v. McGhee, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15066 (W.D.N.Y.) (holding”
    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.