Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 418 SW2D 522 - Johnston v. State

Johnston v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
3
states following
November 2008
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently November 2008 · most notably Russell v. State (1980), Morgan v. State (1985)

34 state decisions

19019671970198019902000decided

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 Washburn v. State · McClanahan v. State · Adams v. State · 170 Tex. Crim. 518 - Smith v. State · Scott 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[t]he general rule against admitting evidence of other crimes by the accused is inapplicable if such evidence logically tends to show his guilt of the offense charged. In other words, relevant evidence that tends to prove that the accused committed the crime charged is not inadmissible simply because it may also reveal that he has committed other crimes.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Appellant’s testimony was to the effect that Graham and other boys had been engaging in homosexual activities with a man and that he counseled Graham not to go to the man’s house again. He offered evidence to the effect that the reputation of Graham was that he was a troublemaker at school and his reputation for truth and veracity was bad. “Appellant testified that the act charged in the indictment did not occur. He denied the hypnotism and vibration routine shown by the testimony of the boys. He testified that he was not in his apartment at the time the state’s testimony showed the offense was committed but was in Amarillo and he also raised as a defense that Graham had framed him and the boys were carrying out a threat to start rumors and accuse him of being ‘a homosexual,’ * * * ‘a damned queer,’ because he did not meet Graham’s demand that he give him $100. All of such testimony of appellant was rebutted by the testimony of the boys denying that threats were made or money was demanded.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““As a general rule, in criminal cases the accused can be convicted, if at all, only by evidence that shows that he is guilty of the offense charged. Consequently, evidence that he has committed other crimes that are remote and wholly disconnected from the offense with which he is charged is ordinarily inadmissible.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.