Bone v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. “we do not know what [appellant’s] legal or emotional relationship with Ms. Barnhill or her children is, whether he is a valued father figure, how he has assisted them and could continue to do so if not in prison, whether he has any other positive relationships with family members, or anything about their life together other than he tells the children he disapproves of drinking and attends some unspecified “meeting.” Although the evidence exhibited by the prosecution suggests he performs good works such as assisting the disabled, the jury really did not learn anything positive about appellant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bone v. State

2. “[o]ne prospective juror, Mr. Freís, admitted to having an association with Mr. Kirkendall through the little league in Seguin, and trial counsel failed to ask Mr. Freís if that would keep him from giving a fair and honest verdict.” Id. Appellant’s counsel did not single out Mr. Freís, but her very next question to the entire panel was: “Does anyone know Mr. Kirkendall well enough that you would feel like it would keep you from giving a fair and honest verdict?” Neither Mr. Freís nor any other venireman responded. The court of appeals found counsel's conduct during voir dire”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bone v. State