Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
11 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston))
Relationships
Relies on Williams v. People of State of New York · Huddleston v. United States · Old Chief v. United States · Townsend v. Burke · Michelson v. United States
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]vidence may be offered by the state and the defendant as to any matter the court deems relevant to sentencing, including but not limited to the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation, his character, an opinion regarding his character, the circumstances of the offense for which he is being tried, and, notwithstanding Rules 404 and 405, Texas Rules of Evidence, any other evidence of an extraneous crime or bad act that is shown beyond a reasonable doubt by evidence to have been committed by the defendant or for which he could be held criminally responsible, regardless of whether he has previously been charged with or finally convicted of the crime or act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Donald v. State · McClure v. State“is such that the sentencing entity (either judge or jury) can rationally find the defendant criminally responsible for the extraneous misconduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The plain language of Section 3(d), on its face, continues to place no condition on the trial court in considering the contents of a PSI....We therefore hold that Section 3(a)(1) of Article 37.07 does not prohibit a trial court, as a sentencing entity, from considering extraneous misconduct evidence in assessing punishment just because the extraneous misconduct has not been shown to have been committed by the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, if that extraneous misconduct is contained in a PSI.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stringer 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.