Heidelberg v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 43 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Doyle v. Ohio · Fletcher v. Weir · Lankston v. State · Zillender v. State · Eisenhauer 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“states the grounds for the ruling that the complaining party sought from the trial court with sufficient specificity to make the trial court aware of the complaint, unless the specific grounds were apparent from the context.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“pursuant to Article 38.071 (Section 6 ) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution as well as Article I Sections 10 and 19 of the Texas Constitution”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re P.M.“a timely objection or motion to strike [must appear] on the record, stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not apparent from the context.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gallups 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.