Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 349 SW3D 535 - State v. Davis

State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio))

Relationships

Relies on Coffey v. State · State v. Bates · Ex Parte Madding · Hill v. State · State v. Evans

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

  1. “as the court of appeals did here. Were it otherwise, both Article 44.29(b) and Rule 21.9(a) & (c), providing for new punishment proceedings only, would be untenable. 7 . After Rule 21,9 was amended in 2007 to expressly require trial courts to grant new trials only as to punishment when appropriate, this Court recognized that Hight no longer controlled.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “A trial court retains plenary power to modify its sentence if a motion for new trial is filed within 30 days of sentencing”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.