Turner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Barnes v. State (1998), Raulerson v. State (1997)
39 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Bumper v. North Carolina · Spring Meadows Apartment Complex Ltd. Partnership v. Stallings · Kent v. Bechtel Group, Inc.
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The prosecution has introduced what is known as victim impact evidence. This evidence has been introduced to show the financial, emotional, psychological, or physical effects of the victim's death on the members of the victim's immediate family. It is intended to remind you as the sentencer that just as the defendant should be considered as an individual, so too the victim is an individual whose death may represent a unique loss to society and the family. This evidence is simply another .method of informing you about the specific ~ harm caused by the crime in question. You may consider this evidence in determining an appropriate punishment. However, your consideration must be limited to a moral inquiry into the culpability of the defendant, not an emotional response to the evidence. As it relates to the death penalty: Victim impact evidence is not the same as an aggravating circumstance. Proof of an adverse impact on the victim's family is not proof of an aggravating circumstance. Introduction of this victim impact evidence in no way relieves the State of its burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one aggravating circumstance which has been alleged. You may consider this victim impact evidence in determining the appropriateness of the death penalty only if you first find the existence of one or more aggravating circumstance has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt by evidence independent from the victim impact evidence, and find that the aggravating circumstance(”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nesbit · Harlow v. State“Because [Beasley] did not receive the death penalty, Witherspoon provides no basis for reversal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Beasley v. State“other states require that the jury be instructed on the purpose of victim impact evidence,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harlow 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.