Parsons v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1983
4 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 Hill v. State · Ex Parte Britton · 114 Tex. Crim. 398 - Stork v. State · 171 Tex. Crim. 339 - Ex Parte Spencer · 112 Tex. Crim. 628 - Stanzel 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.
““Q From your personal knowledge, the distance between South Wayside Drive and Telephone Road is wholly and completely contained in the distance between Holmes Road ? “Mr. Wiebusch: I object to him leading. “The Court: Sustained. “Q (By Mr. McDonough) Do you know whether or not Officer whether South Wayside Drive and Telephone is contained in the distance between Holmes and Delano? “Mr. Wiebusch: Obj ection. “The Court: He said whether or not. “The Witness: Yes, sir. “Q (By Mr. McDonough) Do you know of your own knowledge? “A Yes. “Q Is the distance between South Wayside and Telephone— “Mr. Wiebusch: Objection, that is repetitious. “The Court: Sustained. “Q (By Mr. McDonough) Is it contained within that distance? “The Court: I just sustained it. Don’t try to do by the back door what you can’t do from the front. “Mr. McDonough: Judge, excuse me. I am trying to clarify— “The Court: He objected and I sustained it. “Mr. McDonough: You are not going to let him answer as to his own knowledge? “The Court: He answered, yes. You are not going back over it again, that is what he is objecting to. “Q (By Mr. McDonough) Is it so contained within that distance? “Mr. Wiebusch: Objection, that is repetitious. “The Court: Sustained. If you ask it once — ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parsons v. State““The use of a stamp producing a facsimile of an original signature in signing legal documents has been upheld by this court. Stork v. State, 114 Tex.Cr.R. 398 , 23 S.W.2d 733 ; Ex parte Spencer, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 339 , 349 S.W.2d 727 ; Ex parte Britton, Tex.Cr.App., 382 S.W.2d 264 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Murray 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.