Mayes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 84 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably Duvall v. Reynolds (1998), Mayes v. Gibson (2000)
10 federal appellate · 84 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 · Chapman v. State of California · Lockett v. Ohio · Irvin v. Dowd · Wainwright v. Witt
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When measuring the relevancy of evidence against its prejudicial effect, the court should give the evidence its maximum reasonable probative force and its minimum reasonable prejudicial value.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. STEWART v. STATE · POSEY v. STATE“[T]he concept of parole is sufficiently clear to enable any rational juror to understand it without explaining it further.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[WJhile we hold a jury may logically consider the possibility or absence of parole in determining the sentence a capital murder defendant is to receive, we also hold there is no requirement for a trial judge to explain the Oklahoma parole process to a jury”
3 later decisions 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.