Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 339 SW3D 111 - Hereford v. State

Hereford v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo))

Relationships

Relies on Graham v. Connor · Mapp v. Ohio · Schmerber v. State of California · Whren v. United States · Gerstein v. Pugh

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

  1. “In its review, the appellate court does not perform its own fact-finding mission, but limits the scope of its factual review to determining whether the trial court's findings were reasonable in light of the evidence presented.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.