State v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 125 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Rousan (1998), 42 Cal. 4th 763 - People v. Kelly (2007)
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 125 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 Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Wainwright v. Witt · Powers v. Ohio · Payne v. Tennessee
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 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“highly relevant in determining if accomplice deliberation may be inferred.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In Newlon the state peppered its “send a message” argument with the names of Manson, Speck, and Son of Sam, even though there was no connection of those crimes to facts in the case under consideration. In contrast to Newlon, the state’s reference [in the instant case] to the Manson “family” was quite limited and relevant to explain how a leader can manipulate his followers. Additionally, the court in Newlon found error in the totality of the state’s argument which also included, “If [defendant] was going to harm your child, would you kill him? ... If you think you would have, kill him now. Kill him now .... I’m talking to you as prosecuting attorney of this county — the top law enforcement officer in St. Louis County.” 885 F.2d at 1342 . Newlon is distinguishable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gray v. Bowersox“In determining the punishment to be assessed under Count I against defendant for the murder of Grace Lewis, you must first unanimously determine whether one or more of the following statutory aggravating circumstances exists: * * * ⅜ 4. Whether the defendant directed Brent Rousan to murder Grace Lewis. 5. Whether the murder of Grace Lewis involved depravity of mind and whether, as a result thereof, the murder was outrageously and wantonly vile, horrible, and inhuman. You can make a determination of depravity of mind only if you find: That the defendant killed Grace Lewis after she was bound or otherwise rendered helpless by defendant or Brent Rousan and that defendant thereby exhibited a callous disregard for the sanctity of all human life. * * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rousan
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.