Leadon v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “' Barnes v. State , 855 S.W.2d 173 , 174 (Tex. App. 1993). " ' "[W]e must also look to the entire record to determine if, despite a similarity, there are any significant differences between the characteristics and responses of the veniremembers that would, under the facts of this case, justify the prosecutor treating them differently as potential members of the jury. See Miller-El [v. Dretke ], 545 U.S. [231] at 247, 125 S.Ct. [2317] at 2329, [ 162 L.Ed. 2d 196 (2005) ].”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wiggins v. State · 265 So. 3d 387 - Gaston v. State

2. ““Potential jurors may possess the same objectionable characteristics, but in varying degrees. Additionally, prospective jurors may share a negative feature, but that feature may be- outweighed' by characteristics that are favorable-from the State’s perspective. Such distinctions may not another.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wiggins v. State

3. “' Johnson v. State , 959 S.W.2d 284 , 292 (Tex. App. 1997).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 265 So. 3d 387 - Gaston v. State