Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 444 SW2D 305 - Ysasaga v. State

Ysasaga v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
states following
July 1988
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 71 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently July 1988 · most notably Chambers v. State (1986), Russell v. State (1983)

2 federal appellate · 71 state decisions

410196919701980decided

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 Hannah v. Larche · 166 Tex. Crim. 37 - Cawley v. State · Gonzales v. State · Ramirez v. State · King 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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"... [W]hen a jury, advised of the restrictions which the law places on circumstantial evidence, reaches the conclusion upon evidence properly before them that the accused is guilty, it is not for the reviewing court to supplant their findings by its own unless it is able to point to some weaknesses, omissions, or inconsistencies in the evidence which destroy its cogency.” Floyd at 830 .”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘Where the circumstantial evidence relied on by the prosecution is obviously weak, and where the record on appeal affirmatively shows not only that other testimony which would have cast additional light on the facts was available to the prosecution, but also that the prosecution did not introduce such other evidence or satisfactorily account for its failure to do so, the appellate court will treat the case as one showing reasonable doubt of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction.’ ””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “standard of review, which is discussed in 24 Tex.Jur.2d, Evidence, Sec. 745, p. 927, stems from the untenable presumption that the State's failure to produce and failure to account for the non-production of”
    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.