Uranga v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana))
Relationships
Relies on Smith v. Phillips · Jones v. State · State v. Morales · Franklin v. State · Uranga v. State
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]here was no requirement of a mistrial on a theory that bias must be implied to the juror.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“neither the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals nor the United States Supreme Court has adopted the implied bias doctrine when it is discovered in the middle of a punishment trial that a juror is a victim of the defendant’s extraneous (misdemeanor-level) conduct, we shall not follow Uranga’s suggestion that such a doctrine must be applied in this case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]either the federal nor the state constitution has been held to require an 'implied bias' doctrine.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Uranga v. Davis
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.