Schmutz v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
18 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana))
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Chapman v. State of California · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Arizona v. Fulminante · Johnson v. United States
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the nature of the evidence supporting the verdict, the character of the alleged error and how it might be considered in connection with other evidence in the case, and may include whether the State emphasized the error and whether overwhelming evidence of guilt was present.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Proenza v. State“testimony, physical evidence, jury instructions, the State's theories and any defensive theories, closing arguments, and voir dire, if applicable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Proenza v. State“A structural error affects the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Morris 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.