162 Tex. Crim. 280 - Daviss v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 1999
10 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 34 Tex. Crim. 446 - Josef 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Officer Todd was called as a witness by the appellant. The law does not require the testimony of an accomplice to he corroborated, when given for the accused. The statute forbids conviction upon the testimony of an accomplice, unless corroborated, but does not require such testimony to be corroborated when given for the accused. Josef v. State, 34 Tex.Cr.R. 446 , 30 S.W. 1067 ; Williams v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 37 S.W. 325 .” See also: Hilton v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 638 , 273 S.W.2d 873 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wright 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.