Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 440 SW3D 29 - Schmutz v. State

Schmutz v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
3
states following
November 2023
most recently cited

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.

  1. “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 majority
  2. “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 majority
  3. “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 majority

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.