State v. Richmond’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably State v. Cummings (2000), State v. Lloyd (2001)
3 federal appellate · 70 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 Ohio v. Roberts · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt · Idaho v. Wright · Morgan v. Illinois
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In determining whether serious personal injury has been inflicted for purposes of satisfying the elements of first-degree rape, the court must consider the particular facts of each case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[q]uestions that seek to indoctrinate prospective jurors regarding potential issues before the evidence has been presented and jurors have been instructed on the law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Court: Mr. Foreman, again I would ask if you would stand and for the record state your name, please. Juror Nine [Foreman]: Robert Golden. The Court: Mr. Golden, has the jury reached a unanimous recommendation? Juror Nine: Yes, Your Honor, we have. The Court: Okay. Would you send the envelope to the officer, please. (Juror nine hands the envelope to the bailiff who hands it to the Court.) The Court: You may have a seat. Thank you. Juror Nine: Thank you. The Court: Madam Clerk, would you take the verdict or the recommendation. The Clerk: Will the foreman please stand. Mr. Foreman, the jury has returned as its answers to the issues and recommendation as to punishment as to the defendant, George Malcolm Carroll, in file number 99 CRS 70909 the following: As to issue one, yes; as to issue two, yes; as to issue three, yes; as to issue four, yes. The jury has returned as its recommendation that the defendant be sentenced to death. Is this the unanimous recommendation of the jury? Juror Nine: Yes, it is. The Court: So say you all? (Jurors say “yes.”) The -Court: Would you poll the jury. The Clerk: Will the foreman please stand. Mr. Foreman, you have returned as to the answers to the issues and recommendation as to punishment as to the defendant, George Malcolm Carroll, in file number 99 CRS 70909 the following: As to issue one, yes; as to issue two, yes; as to issue three, yes; as to issue four, yes. Is this your recommendation? Do you still assent thereto? Juror Nine: Yes, I do.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carroll
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.