Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

124 state decisions

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

1. “"Therefore, if you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant, Martin Luther Adams, in Nueces County, Texas, on or about August 26, 1982, did then and there unlawfully, knowing the content and character of certain material, to wit: one (1) motion picture, the title of which is unknown to affiant, to be obscene, unlawfully and knowingly promote obscene material by then and there exhibiting said obscene material to R. Vipon, which material depicts ultimate sexual acts, to wit: sexual intercourse, you will find the Defendant guilty as charged. If you do not so believe, or if you have a reasonable doubt thereof, you will find the Defendant not guilty."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Adams v. State · Simmons v. State

2. ““Appellant concedes there was no proper objection to this instruction made at trial. Without such objection, under Art. 36.19, V.A.C.C.P., only fundamental error requires reversal. Whitson v. State, 495 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Mendoza v. State, 491 S.W.2d 888 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Fennell v. State, 424 S.W.2d 631 (Tex.Cr.App.1968). Fundamental error is an error ‘calculated to injure the rights of the appellant to the extent that he has not had a fair and impartial trial.’ Ross v. State, 487 S.W.2d 744 (Tex.Cr.App.1972).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jewell v. State · Robinson v. State

3. ““MR. SHUVAL [Prosecutor]: If you turn the Defendant loose he is going to go out and kill somebody. “MR. FAIRWEATHER [Defense Counsel]: All right, Your Honor, at this time I renew my objection for a mistrial on the grounds that the statement is not supported by the record, it’s an attempt to prejudice the Jury and totally and — inflammatory. “THE COURT: I will overrule your motion, Mr. Fairweather. “MR. FAIRWEATHER: All right. Then, I also ask the Court to instruct the Jury to disregard the statement by the District Attorney as unsupported by the evidence. “THE COURT: Well, I will ask the Jury to disregard the statement made by the District Attorney. You may proceed, Mr. Shuval. “MR. FAIRWEATHER: Thank you, Your Honor. “MR. SHUVAL: He was charged with driving while intoxicated in 1966 in Houston; in 1972 in Dumas and convicted, in 1972 in Castro County and convicted, and in 1974 in this County and convicted. That’s the thing. Now, you know he has been convicted of car theft in 1949, you don’t know what else he has been convicted of or charged with in between and I am not allowed to introduce that into evidence. “MR. FAIRWEATHER: Your Honor, at this time the defense moves for a mistrial on the grounds that the District Attorney has alluded to and suggested to incriminating facts or allegations that are not in the record supported by the evidence. “MR. SHUVAL: This is a proper answer to the untaken argument of the defense attorney when he did not request a court reporter and he ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Livingston v. State