Dillard v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 2017
9 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 Dendy v. Wilson · Guajardo v. Alamo Lumber Company · Dearing v. State · 140 Tex. Crim. 368 - Hardie v. State · 156 Tex. Crim. 105 - Peterson 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The State of Texas, appellee, contends that as of February 7, 1969, on which day the appellant juvenile became 17 years of age, these causes became moot. The State contends that appellant cannot now be tried as a juvenile, and consequently this appeal and all orders entered by the trial court should be dismissed.” (p. 461) ****** “Thus, Article 2338-1, Sec. 5 requires that the juvenile court adjudge a child to be a ‘delinquent’ child before its jurisdiction of him continues until he is 21 years of age. It is the adjudication of delinquency which extends the court’s jurisdiction. As was said in Lazaros v. State, 228 S.W.2d 972, 975 (Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist.: “ ‘When the trier of the facts found Billy a delinquent child, he automatically came under such (juvenile) court’s jurisdiction until he should reach the age of 21 years * * » (Parenthesis added), (p. 461). ****** “Appellant, having been 16 years and more than 7 months of age when the hearing on transfer and waiver was held, and now being 17 years of age, may be tried for the alleged offenses as an adult in district court. The juvenile court has no further power to act in these cases. See State v. Ferrell, 209 S.W.2d 642, 644 (Tex. Civ.App.), writ ref., n. r. e. “We hold that the cases are now moot, and all previous orders are set aside. The juvenile cases are dismissed. See Guajardo v. Alamo Lumber Company, 159 Tex. 225 , 317 S.W. 2d 725 .” (p. 462). ******”
2 later decisions 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.