Anders v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
January 1988
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Edwards v. State · Cherb v. State · Ysasaga v. State · Reynolds v. State · 108 Tex. Crim. 1 - Minor 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘The test of the sufficiency of such corroboration is to eliminate the evidence of the accomplice from consideration and then to examine the evidence of other witnesses to determine if there is inculpa-tory evidence, evidence of an incriminating nature which tends to connect the accused with the commission of the offense. Merely showing an offense occurred is not sufficient.’ Odom v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 438 S.W.2d 912 ; Edwards v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 427 S.W.2d 629 .” Anders v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 501 S.W.2d 665 . “The corroborative testimony need not supply direct evidence; it must only tend to connect appellant with the crime.” Cherb v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 472 S.W.2d 273 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. State · Powell 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.