904 So. 2d 400 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
97
cited by 97 later decisions
2
states following
August 2019
most recently cited
3 federal appellate · 92 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Blakely v. Washington · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Gideon v. Wainwright
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Id. at 490 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 . Two years later, the United States Supreme Court in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), applied Apprendi's bright-line rule to capital cases, holding as follows:”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“statute. In conducting its analysis, the Supreme Court first acknowledged the importance of the interests that were at stake, see id. at 476 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 (”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“), and the Court then announced a bright-line rule of law that would protect those interests appropriately:”
3 later decisions 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.