State v. Elias’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[C]ourts of appeals should not be forced to make assumptions (or outright guesses) about a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress evidence. De novo review of such a ruling does not resolve this issue because the trial court is still in the best position to judge the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses at a pretrial suppression hearing. Instead, the proper solution to this problem is to require the trial court to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law when ruling on a motion to suppress evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Martinez, Roger Anthony

2. “[a] court of appeals must not affirm or reverse a judgment or dismiss an appeal if: (1) the trial court's erroneous action or failure or refusal to act prevents the proper presentation of a case to the court of appeals; and (2) the trial court can correct its action or failure to act.” Tex.R.App. P. 44.4(a). Subsection (b) requires the appellate court to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Moon, Cameron

3. “to its ruling, and that it made no finding of fact whatsoever with respect to other fact or credibility issues because it regarded them (however erroneously) as peripheral or non-essential to its ultimate legal holding.”

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