Whan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
1 district · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably Collins v. State (1977), 208 Ill. 2d 457 - People Ex Rel. Madigan v. Snyder (2004)
1 district · 44 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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Boulden v. Holman · Maxwell v. Bishop · Mathis v. New Jersey · Quintana v. Texas
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"1. That the defendant has received a pardon from the proper authority, on the presentation of which, legally authenticated, he shall be discharged. "”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Graham v. State · Evans v. State““THE COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE FROM DEATH TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Thus the statute does not provide for modification of punishment, nor do we feel that it may be inferred. In that the statute provides for reformation and correction, we feel that we are limited to those powers. (Art. 5, § 5 of the Texas Constitution, Vernon's Ann.St. restricts the jurisdiction of this Court to the extent provided by statute.) In Whan v. State, 485 S.W.2d 275 (Tex. Cr.App.1972), this court stated: "It has been recently decided that this Court does not have the power to assess punishment at life imprisonment in cases where the death penalty has been assessed illegally by a jury, nor may this Court remand the case for assessment of punishment only, where the punishment was originally set by a jury. Ocker v. State, 477 S.W.2d 288 (Tex.Cr.App.1972). Therefore, it would not be proper for this Court to reverse the judgment of the trial court, insofar as it imposes the death penalty, and to reform the judgment so that punishment is assessed at life imprisonment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Evans 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.