103 Tex. Crim. 668 - McDuff v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 1973
9 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 89 Tex. Crim. 358 - Stanchel v. State · 44 Tex. Crim. 137 - Smith v. State · 60 Tex. Crim. 388 - Wilkerson v. State · Sparks v. State · 100 Tex. Crim. 76 - Neely 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The difficulty about the state's position is that this testimony by appellant was offered after he had objected to the state going into this matter and after he had had his objections overruled and after prosecutrix had already been permitted to testify that he had a wife and two children. This would rather come under the rule that, when improper testimony is admitted by the state, it is usually not cured because appellant offers other testimony along the same line for the purpose of counteracting the testimony improperly elicited by the state."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Alvarez v. State
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.