State v. Rudolph’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2024 · most notably State v. Low (2008), State v. Frierson (2014)
4 federal appellate · 32 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 Burks v. United States · Ashe v. Swenson · United States v. DiFrancesco · Dowling v. United States · United States v. Tateo
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t does not necessarily follow that the "remaining unlawfully" provision is confined to those situations where the initial entry was lawful. We believe that such an interpretation would create an anomalous result. For instance, under [the defendant's] interpretation of the statute, one who enters lawfully but then remains unlawfully and forms the intent to commit another felony, theft, or assault is guilty of burglary while one who enters unlawfully and thereafter forms that same intent is guilty only of trespass. We are unable to see the distinction between the two scenarios. In our view, the actor in the second scenario is at least as dangerous and culpable as the actor in the first.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[IIn order to preserve an issue involving a jury instruction, the objecting party must make an objection in the trial court, stating distinctly the matter to which he objects and the ground of his objection.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (8) multiple punishments for the same offense.”
4 later decisions 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.