Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 548 SW2D 13 - Bullard v. State

Bullard v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
3
states following
April 2017
most recently cited

54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably Texas Workers' Compensation Commission v. Garcia (1995), Martin v. State (1988)

54 state decisions

40019771980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. Zerbst · North Carolina v. Alford · McMann v. Richardson · Duncan v. State of Louisiana

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

  1. “"(b) Except as provided in Art. 37.071 (capital cases), if a finding of guilty is returned, it shall then be the responsibility of the judge to assess the punishment applicable to the offense; provided, however, that (1) in any criminal action where the jury may recommend probation and the defendant filed his sworn motion for probation before the trial began, and (2) in other cases where the defendant so elects in writing at the time he enters his plea in open court, the punishment shall be assessed by the same jury. If a finding of guilty is returned, the defendant may, with the consent of the attorney for the state, change his election of one who assesses the punishment."”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(c) In cases where the matter of punishment is referred to the jury, the verdict shall not be complete until the jury has rendered a verdict both on the guilt or innocence of the defendant and the amount of punishment, where the jury finds the defendant guilty. In the event the jury shall fail to agree, a mistrial shall be declared, the jury shall be discharged, and no jeopardy shall attach.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Under this statutory scheme there must nearly always be a jury at the penalty stage of every capital murder case. See Article 37.071, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. It is a right that cannot be waived. See Article 1.14, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P.; Houston v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 551 , 287 S.W.2d 643 (1956), cert. den. 351 U.S. 975 , 76 S.Ct. 1042 , 100 L.Ed. 1492 (1956)."”
    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.