State v. Bruce’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
April 2021
most recently cited
34 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Arizona v. Youngblood · Harmelin v. Michigan · Rummel v. Estelle · Weems v. United States · Ewing v. California
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We first determine whether the sentence appears grossly disproportionate. To accomplish this, we consider the conduct involved, and any relevant past conduct, with utmost deference to the Legislature and the sentencing court. We also consider the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; and other relevant factors, such as the effect this type of offense has on society. If the sentence does not appear grossly disproportionate, no further review is necessary. If the sentence does appear grossly disproportionate, an intra- and inter-jurisdictional analysis shall be conducted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Schmidt“Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Most
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.