Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 SW3D 618 - Hines v. State

Hines v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably State v. Maestas (2012), Franks v. State (2002)

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

180199920002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 76th Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Tanner v. United States · Sneed v. State · Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. Benton · Buentello v. State · Kendall v. Whataburger, Inc.

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

  1. “Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the jury’s deliberations, or to the effect of anything on any juror’s mind or emotions or mental processes, as influencing any juror’s assent to or dissent from the verdict or indictment. Nor may a juror’s affidavit or any statement by a juror concerning any matter about which the juror would be precluded from testifying be admitted in evidence for any of these purposes. However, a juror may testify: (1) whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror; or (2) to rebut a claim that the juror was not qualified to serve.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Well, I have read 606(b). If the testimony is going to be as to any matter or statement occurring during the course of the jury’s deliberation or to the effect of anything upon a juror's mind or emotions that is influencing the juror or concerning the mental processes in connection with it, then I will sustain the objection to that kind of testimony. I will permit you to put on the evidence that you are offering as a bill of exception.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It has often been held in the civil context that information gathered by a juror and introduced to the other jurors by that juror does not add up to 'outside influence,' even if introduced specifically to prejudice the vote.”
    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.