Rudd v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Durham v. State (1995), Thomas v. State (1997)
41 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 Alford v. State · Cassell v. State · Norton v. State · Willson Safety Products v. Eschenbrenner · Jones 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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Clearly, the state’s case placed the appellant unlawfully in the Rogers’ house . . . and appellant’s testimony did nothing but enhance the state’s evidence when reading his questionable explanation of why Mrs. Rogers found him in her house. No one testified as to having seen anyone run from the Rogers’ house except the appellant. And, in giving his account of what happened, his story differed in both major and minor ways from those versions given by Mrs. Rogers and her neighbors. Clearly, the jury could infer from the evidence that he went to the Rogers’ house . . . thinking that Mrs. Rogers would not be at home. He went to the back door, and unlawfully forced it open, only to be surprised by Mrs. Rogers’ presence. Concerning appellant’s purpose when entering the Rogers’ house, the state introduced appellant’s prior theft and burglary convictions to show his intent to commit burglary and to counter appellant’s defense of mistake and his explanation as to why he entered the house .... . . . [W\ithout appellant’s prior theft and burglary convictions, the state had no evidence showing appellant’s reason for unlawfully entering the Rogers’ house.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A] motion for a directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff’s case has as its purpose a procedure for determining whether the plaintiff has met the burden of establishing a prima facie case, with that question to be resolved by the court as a matter of law. In the event the motion is overruled, the defendant may elect to stand on the motion or to go forward with the production of additional evidence, in which case he has waived any further reliance upon the former motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cummings v. State“if it has independent relevance and its relevance is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brigance 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.