State v. Ruocco’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
June 2025
most recently cited
24 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Olano · Griffin v. California · Arizona v. Fulminante · Neder 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he plain error doctrine ... is not ... a rule of reviewability. It is a rule of reversibility. * That is, it is a doctrine that this court invokes in order to rectify a trial court ruling that, although either not properly preserved or never raised at all in the trial court, nonetheless requires reversal of the trial court's judgment ... for reasons of policy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“given the discrepancies in [uncorroborated testimony by a witness] and the fact that there was only one eyewitness ... we cannot discount the possibility that the jury might have doubted the [testimony of other witnesses] but found the defendant guilty because of his failure to testify”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. A. M.“[t]he jury might have doubted the uncorroborated testimony offered [to establish] the defendant's guilt ... but [found] him [guilty] because he did not take the stand to deny his guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. A. M.
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.