Bloomquist v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

cited by 61 later decisions

states following

May 2017

most recently cited

61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably State v. Hummel (2017), Lancaster v. State (2002)

61 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 · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. · Starr v. State · Wilson v. State

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

“We will not substitute our judgment for that of the jury, ... our only duty is to determine whether a quorum of reasonable and rational individuals would, or even could, have come to the same result as the jury actually did.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. DeWitt v. State · Huff v. State
“"We examine the conduct of defense counsel in light of all the cireumstances in determining whether the identified acts or omissions fall outside the ambit of professionally competent assistance, bearing in mind the function of counsel is to make the adversarial testing process work in every case. We do not evaluate the efforts of counsel from a perspective of hindsight but, rather, we endeavor to reconstruct the cireumstances surrounding counsel's challenged conduct and evaluate the professional efforts from the perspective of counsel at the time."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Baker v. State · Allen v. State
“[alppellant must show that an expert was available who would have testified consistently with his theory.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Strandlien v. State · Mickelson v. State

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.