Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 466 SW2D 293 - Morales v. State

Morales v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
December 2005
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2005 · most notably Brown v. State (1972), Crawford v. State (1980)

30 state decisions

1401971198019902000decided

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 Jackson v. Denno · Harris v. New York · Sims v. State of Georgia · Lopez v. State · Seefurth 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Two or more defendants who are jointly or separately indicted or complained against for the same offense or any offense growing out of the same transaction may be, in the discretion of the court, tried jointly or separately as to one or more defendants; provided that in any event either defendant may testify for the other or on behalf of the state; and provided further, that in cases in which, upon timely motion to sever, and evidence introduced thereon, it is made known to the court that there is a previous admissible conviction against one defendant or that a joint trial would be prejudicial to any defendant, the court shall order a severance as to the defendant whose joint trial would prejudice the other defendant or defendants.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Our law provides that to be guilty of engaging in organized crime as alleged in the indictment, the defendant must, with the intent to establish, maintain or participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination, commit the offense of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance, to wit, cocaine. If you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed the offense of conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, to wit, cocaine, but you have a reasonable doubt as to whether at the time of the commission of the offense he intended to establish, maintain or participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination, you will acquit the defendant of engaging in organized crime.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “there was no showing in the record that Juan knew that (his brother) was armed or that he agreed with him to do anymore than harass a boy who had more girls than they did.”
    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.