Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 219 SW3D 494 - Franks v. State

Franks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 403rd Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Olivo v. State · Slaton v. State · Rodarte v. State · Mestas v. State · Ex Parte Garcia

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. “• the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals "expressly contemplate[d] future action by Franks to file a notice of appeal"; • under Rule 27.1(b), a prematurely filed notice of appeal is one filed between conviction and imposition of sentence, yet Franks's original notice of appeal was filed after imposition of sentence; and • the trial court clerk was not put on notice that there was a new appeal without a new notice of appeal and so "there [wa]s nothing to trigger the appellate process from an administrative standpoint."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In a criminal case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the same day, but after, sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or the appealable order is signed by the trial court. But a notice of appeal is not effective if filed before the trial court makes a finding of guilt or receives a jury verdict.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “point in the appellate process at which he can properly give notice of appeal and then perfect an appeal pursuant to the rules of appellate procedure.”
    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.