Sells v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

70 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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. Would the minimum length of time a Defendant could serve in prison before he could be paroled be something you would want to know in answering the special issues? 2. On which special issue would this be important? 3. How would this 40-year minimum sentence be important to you in answering the special issues? 4. Would you be more likely, or less likely, generally, to view a Defendant as a continuing threat to society if you knew he would not be paroled for a minimum of 40 years[?]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Davis v. State · Swain v. State

2. “Under the law applicable in this case, if the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life, the defendant will become eligible for release on parole, but not until the actual time served by the defendant equals 40 years, without consideration of any good conduct time. It cannot accurately be predicted how the parole laws might be applied to this defendant if the defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for life because the application of those laws will depend on decisions made by prison and parole authorities, but eligibility for parole does not guarantee that parole will be granted.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hankins v. State

3. “The videotape was not offered as information about the individual defendant or about how the individual defendant might be handled. Rather, as the judge noted, it portrayed only one aspect of an entire system and offered only general information about some procedures used in that system. That others have been controlled in the prison system or that certain procedures are in place without specifically connecting those procedures to appellant was not evidence of consequence to the jury’s factual determination of whether appellant would pose a continuing threat to society.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 536 F. App'x 483 - Tommy Sells v. William Stephens, Director