Fleck v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
August 2009
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 176th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on O'NEAL v. State · Phillips v. State · Phillips v. State · Martinez v. State · Farr 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“{1] to protect the accused from the introduction of extraneous evidence; [2] to minimize the risk that the jury might choose to convict, not because one or more crimes were proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but because all of them together convinced the jury the defendant was guilty; [3] to ensure unanimous verdicts; that is, all of the jurors agreeing that one specific incident, which constituted the offense charged in the indictment, occurred; and [4] to give the defendant notice of the particular offense the State intends to rely upon for prosecution and afford the defendant an opportunity to defend.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Duffey 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.