Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 501 S.W.2d 883 - Wallace v. State

Wallace v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
August 2005
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2005

14 state decisions

801973198019902000decided

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 Alejandro v. State · Hopkins v. State · Frison v. State · Brown v. State · Reyna 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"In Matthews v. State, 80 Tex.Cr.R. 177 , 189 S.W. 491 , this Court, in sustaining the trial court's refusal to permit defendant to prove by two witnesses his good reputation for truth and veracity, said: "`The rule is well established that, if the state had attacked his general reputation for truth and veracity by any witness, or had attempted to impeach him by proving contradictory statements, then he would have been permitted to have introduced such proof; but, until such contingency arises, the fact that he gives testimony disputing that offered by the state would make no such testimony admissible.' [Citations omitted.] "The State had not impeached appellant by proving contradictory statements, or attacked his general reputation for truth and veracity. The fact that appellant gave testimony disputing that offered by the State would not put his general reputation in issue. No error is shown in the ruling of the trial court."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The State had not impeached appellant by proving contradictory statements, or attacked his general reputation for truth and veracity. The fact that appellant gave testimony disputing that offered by the State would not put his general reputation in issue. No error is shown in the ruling of the trial court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"The Court of Criminal Appeals rarely reverses a conviction of crime solely because an improper question was propounded to the defendant as a witness. To cause a reversal the question must be obviously harmful to the defendant."”
    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.