Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 48 SW3D 761 - Bustamante v. State

Bustamante v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

50 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Griffin v. California · Cleveland v. United States · Texas v. New Mexico · Tucker v. First Commercial Bank NA · Ramos 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “is whether the language used was manifestly intended or was of such a character that the jury would necessarily and naturally take it as a comment on the defendant’s failure to testify”) (quoting Bustamante v. State, 48 S.W.3d 761, 765 (Tex.Crim.App.2001)). 20 . Overruled on other grounds by Castillo v. State, 913 S.W.2d 529, 532-35 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995). 21 . Appellant claims on appeal that the trial court’s instruction to disregard was “tepid” and”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The Court: The jury is instructed to disregard any comment I made regarding the issue regarding the gang relevance after we hear from the defendant, that I may have said or the prosecutor may have said. [Emphasis added].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.