Curry v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

253 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 253 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “accurately sets out the law, is authorized by the indictment, does not unnecessarily increase the State's burden of proof or unnecessarily restrict the State's theories of liability, and adequately describes the particular offense for which the defendant was tried.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gutierrez-Rodriguez v. State · Mark Ken Tafel v. State

2. “An essential element of abduction is that the defendant intended to prevent the liberation of the complainant. Without this accompanying mental state, there is no abduction; there is only restraint. The accompanying mental state is what transforms mere restraint into abduction. So there is nothing "peripheral” about this intent element. The two alternative mental states provided in the statute are the “manner or means” of engaging in the conduct of abduction.... We have never before held that a statutory alternative "manner or means” of engaging in an act, omission, or conduct constitutes surplus-age. ... We decline the State’s invitation to create this new rule today- [W]e ... hold that the State must allege, in the face of a motion to quash, which type of abduction it seeks to prove in order to give the defendant notice.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gollihar v. State

3. ““Abduct” means to restrain a person with intent to prevent his liberation by using or threatening to use deadly force. “Restrain” means to restrict a person’s movements without consent, so as to interfere substantially with the person’s liberty, by moving the person from one place to another where he is not likely to be found or by confining the person.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Romeo Hinojosa v. State