Ex Parte Brooks’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We agree with appellant that the court of appeals misunderstood her claim. Appellant did not claim that the second indictment was defective because it did not contain tolling language, nor did appellant argue that the indictment ■would still be insufficient even if it did contain tolling language. Appellant contended that the first indictment charged ■only a single theft, which cannot toll limitations for an indictment alleging aggregated theft, regardless of the language or defects in either of the indictments, because tolling does not occur when separate offenses that address different conduct, different acts, and different transactions are,alleged in a subsequent indictment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex parte Alvear

2. “When a charging instrument shows on its face that prosecution is barred by the statute of limitations and that pleading is not reparable, a defendant may seek relief from a time-barred prosecution by a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus. If, on the other hand, the information or indictment does contain a tolling allegation, any errors, omissions, or defects in that tolling language must be raised in a pretrial motion to dismiss or they are waived. These reparable defects cannot be raised by a pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus and are not subject to interlocutory appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Ex parte Alvear