Smith v. Armontrout’s Empirical Analysis
865 F.2d 1502 · 1988
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2010 · most notably Smith v. Armontrout (1989), United States v. Day (1991)
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Ford v. Wainwright · Rees v. Peyton · Huntzinger v. United States · Smith v. Armontrout · Johnson v. Cabana
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The whole presupposition of the criminal law is that most people, most of the time, have free will within broad limits. They are capable of conforming their actions to the requirements of the law, and of appreciating the consequences of failing to do so. Without this fundamental moral and legal assumption, punishment, one of the principal purposes of the criminal law, would be an irrational exercise. The watchword of the law is individual responsibility.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In sum, for the reasons stated, we hold that the new allegations of fact made by the next friends, even when supplemented by ... three new psychiatric affidavits, are not sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact requiring a new evidentiary hearing. The prior finding of competence therefore remains in effect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. Armontrout“If someone decides that he or she prefers to acquiesce in a presumptively lawful judgment of a court, this decision should be respected, unless that person's mental condition is so abnormal that it does not meet accepted legal requirements.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Michael v. Horn
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.