572 So. 2d 232 - State v. Ruffin’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 2007
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Witherspoon v. Illinois · 523 So. 2d 1305 - State v. Mussall · 406 So. 2d 1331 - State v. Edwards · 514 So. 2d 84 - State v. Comeaux · 563 So. 2d 449 - State v. King
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(2) The juror is not impartial, whatever the cause of his partiality. An opinion or impression as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant shall not of itself be sufficient ground of challenge to a juror, if he declares, and the court is satisfied, that he can render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence; (3) The relationship, whether by blood, marriage, employment, friendship, or enmity between the juror and ... the district attorney ... is such that it is reasonable to conclude that it would influence the juror in arriving at a verdict; (4) The juror will not accept the law as given to him by the court; ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A. First degree murder is the killing of a human being: (1) When the offender has specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm and is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of ... armed robbery...; * * * * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.