Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 185 S.W.3d 747 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

34 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Chaney · State v. Wood · State v. Harris · State v. Edwards

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

  1. “There is a distinction between evidence-specific and outcome-determinative prejudice. When the prejudice resulting from the improper admission of evidence is only evidence-specific and the evidence of guilt is otherwise overwhelming, reversal is not required. In contrast, when the prejudice resulting from the improper admission of evidence is outcome-determinative, reversal is required. A finding of outcome-determinative prejudice “expresses a judicial conclusion that the erroneously admitted evidence so influenced the jury that, when considered with and balanced against all of the evidence properly admitted, there is a reasonable probability that the jury would have reached a different conclusion but for the erroneously admitted evidence.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “'A photograph, generally speaking, is superior to words as a means of description, and it should not be rejected because by presenting an accurate portrayal it tends to be inflammatory.'”
    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.