State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. “' "A statute may be found unconstitutional 'as applied' to a specific set of facts or 'on its face.' See Scott v. State , 322 S.W.3d 662 , 665 n. 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) ; Bynum v. State , 767 S.W.2d 769 , 773 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989). Generally, a defendant must show that a statute is unconstitutional 'as applied' to the conduct for which he was charged. See id . at 774 . A claim that a statute is unconstitutional 'as applied' is a claim that the statute operates unconstitutionally with respect to the claimant because of his particular circumstances. Gillenwaters v. State , 205 S.W.3d 534 , 536 n. 3 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wesson v. State · State v. Solomon

2. “we conclude that Appellee’s conduct was not 'sufficiently imbued with elements of communication’ to implicate the First and Fourteenth Amendments,” and”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Johnson, Terence