Schiro v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2008 · most notably Schiro Farley Superintendent Indiana State Prison et al (1994), Bieghler v. State (1985)
2 federal appellate · 40 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · North Carolina v. Pearce · Gregg v. Georgia · Furman v. Georgia · Benton v. Maryland
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“based on the same standards that the jury was required to consider,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[W]e now turn to examine whether the sentence of death is appropriate. The transcript of the sentencing hearing and the trial court's written findings show that the court found that Schiro intentionally killed Laura Luebbehusen while committing or attempting to commit rape. After examining the record, we agree with the trial court's findings. Mary Lee and Dr. Frank Osanka recounted the events as told to them by Schiro. Schiro saw the victim a couple of times prior to the day of the murder. He made up his mind that he would rape her and perform his "ritual." After work, Schiro pretended that his car broke down and thus gained access to Luebbehusen's apartment by requesting assistance. Once inside ... * * * As for the mitigating factors, the trial court did not find any. The court found that the defendant had been engaged in numerous instances of prior criminal conduct. Psychiatrists testified to Schiro's numerous rapes and other criminal deviate conduct. Mary Lee testified about Schiro's sadistic assaults on her child. Another witness testified that Schiro raped her in the presence of her child. Although the defendant related instances of sexual perversion, sadism, necrophilia, exhibitionism, and voyeurism, both of the court-appointed psychiatrists felt that Schiro was in good contact with reality. Both men testified that Schiro was not insane, showed no remorse, was violent and sadistic, and both thought him to be a danger to the community. * * * We find that with the submis”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cooper v. State · Schiro v. State“We will not engage in a different standard of review where jury and trial court disagree.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Schiro v. State · Schiro v. Indiana
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.