Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 56 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Nothing prohibits a single capital murder from containing alternate underlying offenses that are the same statutory offense but with different victims or different underlying methods of commission, so long as the same victim is alleged with respect to the predicate murder.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Saenz, Kimberly Clark · Harper v. State

2. “may disjunctively allege 'all alternate theories of capital murder contained within § 19.03, whether they are found in the same or different subsections, so long as the same victim is alleged for the predicate murder.' " Davis , 313 S.W.3d at 342 (citing Gamboa v. State, 296 S.W.3d 574 , 584 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) ). Both the paragraphs in appellant's indictment required proof that he murdered Waddle. Her murder is thus the "predicate murder”

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

3. “[T]he law does not require a juror to consider any particular piece of evidence as mitigating; all the law requires is that a defendant be allowed to present relevant mitigating evidence and that the jury be provided a vehicle to give mitigating effect to that evidence if the jury finds it to be mitigating.”

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