Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 S.W.3d 811 - State v. Ringo

State v. Ringo’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Moran v. Burbine · Payne v. Tennessee · Alexander v. Louisiana · Griffith v. United States

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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If we give death on Count I, and Life without possibilitie [sic] of parole on Count II, How will the counts be carried out? Is there a chance that our Count I verdict will/could be changed, [sic]” After conferring with the state and defense counsel, the judge stated her inclination was simply to inform the jury she could give no further instructions. The note was read into the record, and both the state and defense counsel agreed to the judge’s suggestion. At that point, the judge sent a written response to the jury stating,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) Whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbi-traryfactor; and (2) Whether the evidence supports the jury’s or judge’s finding of a statutory aggravating circumstance as enumerated in subsection 2 of section 565.032 and any other circumstance found; (3) Whether the sentence of death is excessive or "disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime, the strength of the evidence, and the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The existence of [the witness’s] plea bargain presented a potential credibility problem for him as a witness. The state, recognizing that fact and anticipating the defense’s inevitable attempt to impeach him, decided as a matter of trial strategy to reveal the existence of the agreement, which was for truthful testimony. Neither error nor vouching is evident.”
    1 later decision 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.