Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently October 1992
23 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 166 Tex. Crim. 349 - Hamman v. State · 156 Tex. Crim. 585 - Watson v. State · Perez v. State · 106 Tex. Crim. 474 - Marberry 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An accused may introduce evidence of his good character to show that it is improbable that he did the act charged. Hamman v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 349 , 314 S.W.2d 301 ; Jones v. State, 10 Tex.App. 552 ; McCormick & Ray’s Texas Law of Evidence, Vol. 2, p. 332, Sec. 1492; 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 676, pp. 699-700. “It appears to be the settled law, however, that the good character of the accused may not be proved by testimony that he has never been previously charged with or convicted of a criminal offense. Perez v. State, [ 153 Tex.Cr.R. 223 ,] 221 S.W.2d 915 ; Marberry v. State, 106 Tex.Cr.R. 474 , 292 S.W. 1107 ; 23 Tex.Jr.2d 262, Sec. 171. “The inquiry as to character must be limited to the general reputation of the person in the community of his residence or where he is best known. Brownlee v. State, 13 Tex.App. 255 ; Watson v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 585 , 244 S.W.2d 515 ; 23 Tex Jr.2d 260, Sec. 171.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Bower · Pittman v. State““In view of the provision of Art. 37.07, Sec. 2(b), evidence may now be offered before a jury impaneled to assess the punishment ‘as to the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation and his character,’ whether such jury is impaneled pursuant to Art. 26.14 or after the jury verdict of guilty has been returned.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Piraino v. State · Smith v. State““We know of no rule of evidence which would allow a defendant to testify to facts which he would not be allowed to prove, if he could, by other evidence. “The rules stated apply alike to testimony of the defendant and the testimony of another witness in his behalf. The evidence which the trial court excluded at the trial on the issue of guilt was not admissible to show that the defendant’s character was good.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schmidt 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.