Cleary v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Castro v. Ward (1998), Bland v. State (2000)
5 federal appellate · 21 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 Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · United States v. Agurs · Arizona v. Fulminante · Furman v. Georgia
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.
“a 'significant restraint' on the liberty of the parolee who is subject to control of the parole board 'under the cloud of an unexpired sentence.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] first degree burglary always carries with it the likelihood for a violent encounter with an occupant . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. FREDERICK v. STATE · BUSBY v. STATE“This Court has stated that both “victim impact statements” and “victim impact evidence” are admissible in a capital sentencing procedure. This includes a victim’s rendition of the “circumstances surrounding the crime, the manner in which the crime was perpetrated, and the victim’s opinion of a recommended sentence.” However, “evidence may be introduced ‘that is so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair,’ thus implicating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Wilson 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.