Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 756 F.2d 1483 - Ross v. Kemp

Ross v. Kemp’s Empirical Analysis

756 F.2d 1483 · 1985

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
October 2010
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2010 · most notably Cabana v. Bullock (1986), Mitchell v. Kemp (1985)

19 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

3501985199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · Giglio v. United States · Townsend v. Sain

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “as requiring a level of individual participation that justifies the application of the death penalty,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “We do not read Enmund as barring the death penalty for all non-triggermen, but merely as requiring a level of individual participation that justifies the application of the death penalty. The Supreme Court’s objection in Enmund that Earl Enmund was to be executed “regardless of whether [he] intended or contemplated that life would be taken,” id. [102 S.Ct.] at 3379, simply does not extend to appellant whose actions undeniably reflect the contemplation that life would be taken. Appellant does not deny that he and Turner held the Stanford family hostage while their cohorts went to the Lee home. Likewise, it is undisputed that appellant was armed and in the dining room with Turner when Lieutenant Meredith entered the home. He was thus actively engaged in furthering the cause of events that led directly to Meredith’s murder, whether or not he actually pulled the trigger, (citations omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the Eighth Amendment [does not] permi[t] imposition of the death penalty on one . . . who aids and abets a felony in the course of which a murder is committed by others but who does not himself kill, attempt to kill, or intend that a killing take place or that lethal force will be employed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.