Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 SW3D 714 - State v. Wooldridge

State v. Wooldridge’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland))

Relationships

Relies on Monge v. California · Sanabria v. United States · Bullington v. Missouri · Arizona v. Rumsey · Monge v. California

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

  1. “This case is unlike Harris in that the record does support the contention that Wooldridge’s sentence was statutorily unauthorized at the time it was pronounced. The record does show that the trial court believed that the enhancement allegations were true. Its decision not to assess punishment was based, not on any fact, but on a ruling of law. That ruling, as we have held above, was incorrect.”
    1 later decision 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.