Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 SW3D 348 - LeFevers v. State

LeFevers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2001
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Almanza v. State · Rezac v. State · Eastep v. State · Mosley v. State · Pettijohn v. State

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

  1. “(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass another, he: (1) initiates communication by telephone or in writing and in the course of the communication makes a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene; i¡{ ‡ (b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(1), “obscene” means containing a patently offensive description of or a solicitation to commit an ultimate sex act, including sexual intercourse, masturbation, cunnilingus, fellatio, or anilingus, or a description of an excretory function. * * * *”
    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.