Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 SW3D 723 - Matthews v. State

Matthews v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 8th Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Clewis v. State · Johnson v. State · Jackson v. State · Santellan 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[E]ven had Appellant’s cases been tried separately, it is probable that the testimony of the other victims would have been admissible to refute the defensive theory that the complainants for whatever reason, concocted the story... .We conclude that the trial court could have reasonably found that joinder of the cases was not unfairly prejudicial against Appellant. Therefore, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in trying the cases together.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.