Ngo v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

271 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 274 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Count II Now, if you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the 21st day of October, 2009, in Bexar County, Texas, the defendant, JESUS CARDOSO, hereinafter referred to as Defendant, did intentionally or knowingly fail to unreasonably provide necessary food, water, care, or shelter for an animal in defendant’s custody, namely; a Turtle, to wit: Animal A093137, and the defendant’s conduct was not a generally accepted and otherwise lawful form of conduct occurring solely for the purpose of or in support of fishing, hunting, or trapping; or wildlife management, wildlife or depredation control, or shooting preserve practices as regulated by state and federal law; or animal husbandry or agriculture practice involving livestock animals, then you will find the defendant guilty as charged. Unless you so find beyond a reasonable doubt, or if you have a reasonable doubt thereof, then you will find the defendant not guilty.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Juan Rodriguez v. State · Sanchez v. State

2. “After you retire to the jury room, you should select one of your members as your Foreman. It is his or her duty to preside at your deliberations, vote with you, and when you have unanimously agreed upon a verdict, to certify to your verdict by using the appropriate form attached hereto and signing the same as Foreman.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kevin Lavelle Kent v. State · O'Brien v. State

3. “[I]f you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Leonardo Martinez, on or about the 1st day of January, 2004, in the County of Travis, and State of Texas, did then and there knowingly or intentionally cause the penetration of the anus of [L.Z.], a child younger than 14 years of age and not his spouse, by the sexual organ of the said Leonardo Martinez, or if you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Leonardo Martinez, did then and there knowingly or intentionally cause the anus of [L.Z.], a child younger than 14 years of age and not his spouse, to contact the sexual organ of the said Leonardo Martinez, you will find the defendant guilty of the offense of Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Garcia v. State · Mendoza v. State