Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 183 S.W.3d 403 - Harm v. State

Harm v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

28 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston))

Relationships

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · United States v. Agurs · Kyles v. Whitley · Grupo Mexicano Desarrollos v. Alliance Bond Fund Inc

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

  1. “[E]vidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Favorable evidence is any evidence that, if disclosed and used effectively, may make a difference between conviction and acquittal and includes both exculpatory and impeachment evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[held] that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.