In Re Cornyn’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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.

1. “... over seized property extends to different courts at different times and for different purposes: for example, to the magistrate to whom return was made, for the seized property’s pre-charge or pre-indictment safekeeping and for the property’s or person’s release before examining trial; n. 19 to any magistrate in the county of seizure, for removing the property pre-charge or pre-indictment from the county in which it was seized; n. 20 to a magistrate presiding over an examining trial; n. 21 to the judge of the court in which indictment is presented, for any matter concerning the property; n. 22 to the judge of the court in which the accused is convicted, for forfeiture of certain property; n. 23 to the magistrate to whom the return was made, for article 18.18 forfeiture proceedings when no prosecution or conviction occurs; n. 24 etc. 19 Tex.Code Crim. P. Ann. arts. 18.10-.12 (Vernon 1977 & Supp.2000). 20 Id. art. 18.10. 21 See id. art. 18.03 (search warrant may include arrest warrant); id. art. 18.13 (allowing the magistrate to release defendant and restore property if no good ground for-warrant’s issuance); id. art. 18.14 (Vernon 1977) (allowing examining trial “as in other cases” if magistrate concludes there was good cause for arrest warrant’s issuance); see also id. art. 15.16 (Vernon 1977) (requiring “magistration” before magistrate who issued or is named in warrant, if in same county); id. art 15.17(a)-(d) (Vernon Supp.2000) (allowing “magistration” before any magistr”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Antoine M. Shields v. State