Zanders v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

cited by 52 later decisions

states following

February 1997

most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently February 1997 · most notably Myre v. State (1977), Banks v. State (1974)

2 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

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 172 Tex. Crim. 7 - Gaskin v. State · Wall v. State · Rose v. State · Clark v. Beto · Sewell 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“"... then it is error for the trial judge to fail to require production of a prior and available statement of the witness, though the error may be harmless. The harmfulness of the error is dependent upon whether an examination of the statement by this Court demonstrates that the defendant should have been allowed the statement for the purpose of cross-examination and possible impeachment. Error, of course, will result if the defendant is denied the opportunity to have made available such statement for the appellate record for the purpose of showing injury, if any." (emphasis supplied) Rose v. State, 427 S.W.2d 609, 612 (Tex.Cr.App.1968) (concurring opinion).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Young v. State · Lewis v. State
“[w]here, as in the instant case, appellant demonstrates that he was entitled to inspect the prior statement of the witness and the court erred in failing to order its production, and further, after adequate post trial request, also fails to incorporate the statement in the appellate record, reversible error has been committed because the appellant has been denied the opportunity to prove harm to this court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Franklin v. State · Young v. State
““Where a witness for the State has made a report or has given a statement prior to testifying, the defendant, after a timely and specific motion, is entitled to inspect and use such prior and available report or statement for cross examination and impeachment purposes, and this right obtains even though the witness has not used the instrument to refresh his memory.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Sheldon v. State · Carraway v. State

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.