108 Wash. 2d 734 - State v. Rupe’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 97 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Fisher v. Oklahoma (1988), 117 Wash. 2d 829 - State v. Lord (1992)
9 federal appellate · 97 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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Furman v. Georgia · Lockett v. Ohio · Irvin v. Dowd · Sheppard v. Maxwell
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Upon conclusion of the evidence and argument at the special sentencing proceeding, the jury shall retire to deliberate upon the following question: “Having in mind the crime of which the defendant has been found guilty, are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there are not sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency?"”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) the inflammatory or noninflamatory nature of the publicity; (2) the degree to which the publicity was circulated throughout the community; (3) the length of time elapsed from the dissemination of the publicity to the date of trial; (4) the care exercised and the difficulty encountered in the selection of the jury; (5) the familiarity of prospective or trial jurors with the publicity and the resultant effect upon them; (6) the challenges exercised by the defendant in selecting the jury, both peremptory and for cause; (7) the connection of government officials with the release of publicity; (8) the severity of the charge; and (9) the size of the area from which the venire is drawn.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) Whether there was sufficient evidence to justify the affirmative finding to the question posed by RCW 10.95-.060(4); and (b) Whether the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime and the defendant. . . .; and (c) Whether the sentence of death was brought about through passion or prejudice.”
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.