Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 SW3D 554 - Routier v. State

Routier v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

48 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Chapman v. State of California · Cuyler v. Sullivan · Chambers v. Mississippi · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts

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

  1. “(d) Supplementation. If anything relevant is omitted from the reporter's record, the trial court, the appellate court, or any party may by letter direct the official court reporter to prepare, certify, and file in the appellate court a supplemental reporter’s record containing the omitted items. Any supplemental reporter’s record is part of the appellate record. (e) Inaccuracies in the reporter’s record. (1) Correction of inaccuracies by agreement. The parties may agree to correct an inaccuracy in the reporter’s record, including an exhibit, without the court reporter's recerti-fication. (2) Correction of inaccuracies by trial court. If the parties cannot agree on whether or how to correct the reporter’s record so that the text accurately discloses what occurred in the trial court and the exhibits are accurate, the trial court must — after notice and hearing — settle the dispute. If the court finds any inaccuracy, it must order the court reporter to conform the reporter’s record (including text and any exhibits) to what occurred in the trial court, and to file certified corrections in the appellate court. (3) Correction after filing in appellate court. If the dispute arises after the reporter's record has been filed in the appellate court, that court may submit the dispute to the trial court for resolution. The trial court must then proceed as under subparagraph (e)(2).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) if the rule was violated and the witness disqualified, were there particular circumstances, other than the mere fact of the violation, which would tend to show the defendant or his counsel consented, procured or otherwise had knowledge of the witness’s presence in the courtroom, together with knowledge of the content of that witness’s testimony; and (2) if no particular circumstances existed to justify disqualification, was the excluded testimony crucial to the defense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the appellant must show (1) that a significant portion of the record was lost or destroyed, (2) through no fault of her own, (3) that the missing portion of the record is necessary to her appeal, and (4) the parties cannot agree on the record”
    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.