Martinez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Appellant's fourth ground of error is that the Court erred in not granting his motion to limit the penalty to fifteen years. He bases this contention upon the fact that this appellant was indicted as a habitual criminal and brought to trial before Judge Blackwell, where the State waived or abandoned the allegations as to the prior convictions and Judge Blackwell sentenced the appellant to fifteen years for the primary offense. Subsequently, Judge Blackwell granted appellant's motion for new trial. The prior indictment was dismissed and the appellant was again indicted as a habitual criminal, with the same two prior convictions alleged for enhancement, and brought to trial before Judge Thurman where the prior convictions were proven and his punishment was assessed by Judge Thurman at life as required by law. "The proof before Judge Thurman that the appellant was the same person who had been convicted in the two prior convictions alleged for enhancement distinguishes this case from North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 , 89 S.Ct. 2072 , 23 L.Ed.2d 656 , upon which appellant relies. See Branch v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 445 S.W.2d 756 ."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Alvarez v. State

2. “(h)e neither alleges nor contends that the confession was involuntarily given nor does he allege any facts which would establish the involuntariness of the confession.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Martinez v. Estelle