Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Does anybody here had [sic] a son, daughter, grandson or granddaughter that has been the victim of any type of sexual assault or sexual abuse that might make you feel like you could not serve on this jury? What’s your number? JUROR: 18. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Could you tell me about that? JUROR: Family members. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Was that your son or daughter? JUROR: Yes. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: The fact that that happened to you, are you going to hold that against Mr. Scott? JUROR: Well, I got to ask you a question. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Yes, sir. JUROR: You announced that he had possession of pornographic material. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Yes, I did say that. JUROR: And that could entice young kids into an act. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: You’re right. JUROR: So, it is extremely hard to be able to stay focused on it without hearing all the facts. But that one statement was awful strong for the D.A. in my opinion. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: What number are you? JUROR: 28.”

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

2. “(a) Whenever two or more offenses have been consolidated or joined for trial under Section 3.02, the defendant shall have a right to a severance of the offenses. [[Image here]] (c) The right to severance under this section does not apply to a prosecution for offenses described by Section 3.03(b)(2) unless the court determines that the defendant or the state would be unfairly prejudiced by a joinder of offenses, in which event the judge may order the offenses to be tried separately or may order other relief as justice requires. 8”

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

3. “[Wjhere a defendant in a case of felony persists in pleading guilty or in entering a plea of nolo contendere, if the punishment is not absolutely fixed by law, a jury shall be impaneled to assess the punishment and evidence may be heard to enable them to decide thereupon, unless the defendant in accordance with Articles 1.13 or 37.07 shall have waived his right to trial by jury.”

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