Hoover v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 1982
7 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 171 Tex. Crim. 608 - Jones v. State · Heman v. Wade · 61 Tex. Crim. 334 - Brown v. State · 160 Tex. Crim. 593 - Gizzo v. State · 163 Tex. Crim. 177 - Fulcher 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * The indictment alleged that on or about March 11, 1964, and before the commission of robbery by firearms of Mair Schepps, by John Oscar Young, Samuel Spivey, and Calvin Sellars, the appellant did unlawfully and wilfully advise, command, and encourage them to commit said offense, the appellant not being present at the time of the commission of the robbery by said three named persons. * * *” “The evidence reveals that after Spivey, Young, and Sellars had been advised by the appellant that Schepps had $300,000 in money in his home, the appellant encouraged them among other things, to “get you a car and equipment (guns) and get ready to go in,” and he also told them where to look for the money in the house. These three men, wearing masks, two of whom were armed with pistols and one with a sawed-off shotgun, went to the Schepps’ home about 7 P.M., March 11, 1964. While they were preparing to enter the house, Mrs. Tuck, a nurse employed by Schepps, left the house to go to a nearby garage apartment and she was knocked unconscious by one of the masked men. Two of the robbers entered the main house and violently assaulted Mr. and Mrs. Schepps and the third robber brought Mrs. Tuck into the house shortly thereafter. “After numerous unsuccessful inquiries about the $300,000 the robbers’ acts of violence and torture increased, to compel the Schepps to reveal the location of the money. Mrs. Schepps’ jaw was broken, and some of her teeth were knocked out and others loosened; she was”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Hoover v. Beto · Hoover v. Beto“A pair of slacks, a black shirt, a hat, a pair of gloves, and rolls of adhesive tape were found in a garbage can near the home of Calvin Sellars. Fibers taken from the articles were shown to be identical with those removed from the carpet in the Schepps home, and an examination of traces of human blood on some of the articles revealed the blood to be the same type as Mr. Schepps's. Also a human hair taken from the shirt was shown to be identical to one removed from Sellars. Furthermore, the officers recognized the trousers found in the can as the same ones Sellars was wearing at the time of a previous arrest. "Upon a search of appellant's house following the arrest of the three robbers, the officers found therein two diamonds, one weighing 4.83 carats and the other 2.70 carats.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hoover v. Beto““ * * * Mr. Hoover told me a search warrant was unnecessary, to come on in and look anywhere I pleased.” (S/F p. 673). On voir dire by the defense: “Q. And after you told him you had a warrant to search his home, what did he say? A. He said a search warrant is unnecessary, come on in.” (S/F p. 676) “Q. Did you show it (the warrant) to him? A. I had it in my hand. I don’t know whether he saw it' or not. He said a search warrant was unnecessary, to come on in. A. I gave Mr. Hoover the warrant after I stepped through the door. Q. And he read the search warrant ? A. Yes. He said something like let me see what you are looking for. Q. And he read the search warrant? A. Yes sir.” (S/F pp. 682-683).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hoover v. Beto
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.