Scamardo v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Zillender v. State (1977), Garrett v. State (1981)
89 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 Campbell v. State · United States v. Garza · 105 Ill. App. 2d 14 - People v. Smith · 23 Cal. App. 3d 180 - People v. Youngs · Kelly 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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Further, the State would show that the Court Ordered the defendant herein to abide by certain conditions of community supervision during the term of community supervision and among the conditions ordered by the Court were the following: 1) Obey all orders of the Court and the Community Supervision Officer. 2) Commit no offense against the laws of this State or of any other State or of the United States. The State would further show to the Court that the said Defendant, during the period of Community Supervision, violated the terms and conditions of Community Supervision as follows: 1) The defendant, Harold Dean Willis, on or about the 18th day of March, 1997 in Brazos County, Texas did then and there intentionally, knowingly, and unlawfully appropriate property by acquiring and otherwise exercising control over property, other than real property, to-wit: fish hooks of the value of $1,500.00 or more but less than $20,000.00, from SNL Corporation, without the effective consent of Marc Snell, the owner thereof, and with intent to deprive said owner of said property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Willis v. State“A revocation of probation does not require proof sufficient to sustain a criminal conviction. All that is required is enough evidence, within [a] sound judicial discretion to satisfy the district judge that the conduct of the probationer has not met the conditions of the probation. United States v. Garza, 484 F.2d 88 (5th Cir.1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Fance v. State““ . . .in other words, that greater weight of the credible evidence which would create a reasonable belief that the defendant has violated a condition of his probation . . . ” 517 S.W.2d 293 at 298 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hernandez 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.