Young v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
August 1987
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Smith v. State · Smith v. State · 169 Tex. Crim. 198 - Dunlap v. State · 110 Tex. Crim. 550 - Carnahan, Alias v. State · 124 Tex. Crim. 639 - Ware 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) For the purpose of this section: (1) ‘Forge’ means: (A) to alter, make, complete, execute, or authenticate any writing so that it purports: (i) to be the act of another who did not authorize that act; (ii) to have been executed at a time or place or in a numbered sequence other than was in fact the case; or (iii) to be a copy of an original when no such original existed; (B) to issue, transfer, register the transfer of, pass, publish, or otherwise utter a writing that is forged within the meaning of Paragraph (A) of this subdivision; . . . .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Burks v. State · Reed v. State““From this definition it appears to be readily apparent that the act in question, in addition to being with the intent to defraud, must purport to be the act of another who did not authorize the act.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Reed 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.