State v. Rouse’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
149 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 161 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably State v. Fair (2001), State v. Barnes (1997)
149 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Griffin v. California · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Doyle v. Ohio · Furman v. Georgia
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 161 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“he must demonstrate that the prosecutor's closing arguments amounted to gross impropriety.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rowsey · State v. Anderson“In the case before us, the prosecutor argued: Now, you’ll recall that the questions asked of you were “Do you have any moral or religious scruples against the death penalty?” Each of you, in your own way, indicated you did not. And, then I asked you “Do you feel like it’s an appropriate punishment in some cases,” and each of you said, “Yes,” you did, in some cases. You also indicated that it would be difficult for you to do, as well it should be. It’s an ultimate punishment. To recommend it is the most serious thing you can do in a courtroom. But, there are some cases where it must be done. And, if this isn’t one, I can’t imagine one. The law in this state will only let us ask you for a death penalty in certain very, very specific instances. We are required, indeed required, to ask you for the death penalty in certain cases. We don’t have an option. And, in this particular case, we are asking you because the law says we must, but because it deserves it as well. And, it deserves it because it has an aggravating circumstance. The aggravating circumstance in this case is just as plain as any one of those pictures is to you. The aggravating circumstance in this case is that this killing, this murder, this first degree slaughter of this child, by that woman (Points to Defendant), and Ronald Pierce, was especially heinous. It was especially atrocious, and it was especially cruel.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A murder is [especially] `heinous, atrocious, or cruel' when it is a `conscienceless or pitiless crime which is unnecessarily torturous to the victim.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Anderson · State v. Burr
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.