State v. Rumble’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably State v. Hunter (1987), Nicolai v. City of St. Louis (1988)
4 federal appellate · 29 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 State v. Holland · State v. Jewell · State v. Berndt · State Ex Rel. Missey v. City of Cabool · State v. Clark
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]o constitute a defense to a criminal charge, the coercion must be present, imminent, and impending and of such a nature as to induce a well grounded apprehension of death or serious bodily injury if the act is not done. Threat of future injury is not enough. Nor can one who has a reasonable opportunity to avoid doing the act without undue exposure to death or serious bodily injury invoke the doctrine as an excuse.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Porter · State v. Horne“... because he was coerced to do so, by the use of, or threatened imminent use of, unlawful physical force upon him or a third person, which force or threatened force a person of reasonable firmness in his situation would have been unable to resist. Section 562.071.1 RSMo 1994.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Crenshaw · State v. Hope“As to Count I, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about January 8, 1983, in the County of St. Louis, State of Missouri, Vincent Sargent caused the death of Det. Sgt. Charles James by shooting him, and Second, that Vincent Sargent did so in committing, together with the defendant, the crime of possession of a controlled substance, schedule I, over 35 grams of marijuana, then you will find the defendant guilty of murder in the second degree. However, if you do not find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of that offense. A person is guilty of possession of over 35 grams of marijuana if he possesses that amount of marijuana and is aware of the character of the substance and knew that he possessed it. If you do find the defendant guilty under Count I of murder in the second degree in connection with possession of over 35 grams of marijuana, you will fix his punishment at imprisonment by the Division of Corrections for a term fixed by you, but not less than ten years nor more than life imprisonment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Norwood
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.