Rucker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably Heidler v. State (2000), Cheddersingh v. State (2012)
35 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 · Jackson v. Virginia · Cage v. Louisiana · Payne v. State · Smith 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the form would mislead jurors of reasonable understanding, or the trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the presumption of innocence, the State’s burden of proof, the possible verdicts that could be returned, or how the verdict should be entered on the printed form.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“In your verdict form, Count I will contain findings relating to malice murder, felony murder and voluntary manslaughter. If you do not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of malice murder, then you would be authorized to find him guilty of felony murder or voluntary manslaughter. If you do find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of either of those offenses, you should specify the offenses in which you find him guilty. The form of your verdict would be we, the jury, find the defendant guilty of, and you would name the offense. In the event you do find the defendant guilty of causing the death of the alleged victim, you would be authorized to find him guilty of only one of the homicide forms defined for you and set out in Count I. If you find that the State has failed to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to all charges, then it would be your duty to acquit the defendant, and the form of your verdict would be we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty, and you would specify in your verdict each Count upon which you have found the defendant not guilty. If you find the defendant guilty of some Counts and not guilty of some Counts, you should specify each Count upon which you find him guilty and each Count upon which you find him not guilty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State“draw an inference, however unfounded, of predisposition on the part of the trial judge”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brown 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.