Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 479 S.W.2d 311 - Smith v. State

Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
June 1988
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Wall v. State · Zanders v. State · Schulz v. State · Davis v. State · Barr 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It does not appear that the State’s case had been ‘injured’ by the witness’ testimony. There was a mere failure of expected proof. The State was not entitled to attempt to impeach [their witness]. Article 38.28, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. 1 Branch’s Ann.P.C.2d, § 186 at 195-197 (2d ed. 1956) and see Zanders v. State, 480 S.W.2d 708 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Perkins v. State, 433 S.W.2d 712 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Wall v. State, 417 S.W.2d 59 (1967); Crandall v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 229 , 340 S.W.2d 36 (1960) and Mims v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 180 , 261 S.W.2d 727 (1953).””
    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.