Clark v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1983
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 155 Tex. Crim. 514 - Lewis v. State · 158 Tex. Crim. 311 - Alford v. State · Palomo 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““For the argument to come within the mandatory prohibition of Art. 710, supra, (now Art. 38.08 V.A.C.C.P.) it must be such as cannot be reasonably applied to the failure of the accused to produce other testimony than his own.” Clark v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 362 S.W.2d 647 . See also Ramos v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 419 S.W.2d 359, 367 ; Costilla v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 335 , 327 S.W.2d 593 ; Alford v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 311 , 255 S.W.2d 519 ; and cases cited under Art. 38.08 V.A.C.C.P., Note 77.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bass v. State
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.