Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 481 S.W.2d 113 - Crutcher v. State

Crutcher v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
2
states following
May 2001
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently May 2001 · most notably Todd v. State (1980), Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District of Texas (1987)

40 state decisions

1901972198019902000decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Mooney v. Holohan · Giles v. State of Maryland

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

  1. “"Reversible error is also committed where the prosecutor negligently or inadvertently fails to disclose evidence which may exonerate the accused or which may be of material importance to the defense, even though not offered as testimony at the trial and even though the accused's counsel is not diligent in his preparation for trial."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““I’d sort of hoped Mr. Bruner [defense counsel] would stay with us in the courtroom . . . but I can assure you one thing, that wherever he has gone, he is not down on his knees praying to his God. I can assure you that . . ..””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"... When the `reliability of a given witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence,' non-disclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls within this general rule ... We do not, however, automatically require a new trial whenever `the combing of the prosecutor's files after the trial has disclosed evidence possibly useful to the defense but not likely to have changed the verdict...' .... A finding of materiality of the evidence is required under Brady, supra, [373 U.S.] at 87, 83 S.Ct. at 1190 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 . A new trial is required if the `false testimony could ... in any reasonably likelihood have affected the judgment of the jury ...' Napue v. Illinois, supra, [360 U.S.] at 271, 79 S.Ct. at 1178 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1217 ."”
    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.