Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 436 SW3D 333 - Christopher Allen Phillips v. State

Christopher Allen Phillips v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 19th Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Almanza v. State · Green v. State · Conner v. State · Valdez v. State · Ex Parte Zepeda

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

  1. “A defendant may not be convicted of an offense on the testimony of a person to whom the defendant made a statement against the defendant's interest during a time when the person was imprisoned or confined in the same correctional facility as the defendant unless the testimony is corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the offense committed.”). 12 . The State suggests we apply an”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Q. Okay. So Chris never specifically said, “I want you to lie about this.” A. He asked — he pretty much, you know what I’m saying, asked me to sign an affidavit. Just like I told him and said first, pretty much asked me to sign an affidavit saying that Andre was going to try to put the case off on him, you know what I’m saying. If it’s saying lying or what you feel like that is, I don’t know.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “'the testimony of a person to whom the defendant made a statement against the defendant's interest' must, at a minimum, tend to connect the defendant with the offense committed ...”
    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.