Rodriguez v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Stoker v. State (1989), Russell v. State (1980)
48 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 Walker v. State · Jones v. State · Hafti v. State · Parks v. State · State v. Netto
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.
““The term motive is used to express different concepts, [footnote omitted] As used here, motive refers to an emotion that would provoke or lead to the commission of a criminal offense. Evidence to show motive is the circumstantial evidence that would appear to cause or produce the emotion. When it is said that evidence going to show motive is admissible, it is meant that the circumstantial evidence is admissible that would appear to cause or produce the emotion that would ir\ turn provoke or incite the com mission of the criminal offense. See 1 Wigmore, Evidence, § 117 at 558 (3d ed. 1940) and 2 McCormick and Ray, § 1534 at 382 (2d ed. 1956). * # * * * * “We have not been cited any cases and a diligent search has revealed no case where it has been held that the absence or lack of motive in a particular case would authorize the admission of extraneous or collateral offenses in which there was an apparent absence or lack of motive.” (Emphasis added.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hafdahl v. State · Brown v. State““The prosecution may always offer evidence, if it is known to exist, to show motive for the commission of an offense because it is relevant as a circumstance tending to prove the commission of an offense, (footnote omitted) “However, ‘the proposed testimony, to be admissible as proof of motive, must fairly tend to raise an inference in favor of the existence of a motive on the part of the accused to commit the alleged offense for which he is on trial.’ ” (citations omitted)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Foy v. State““The prosecution may always offer evidence, if it is known to exist, to show motive for the commission of an offense because it is relevant as a circumstance tending to prove the commission of an offense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Russell 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.