Baker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In Stuebgen v. State, supra, and Baker v. State, supra, we said “ ‘While the requisite culpable mental state under Section 32.21(b) is “intent to defraud or harm,” we fail to perceive how such culpable mental state can be shown absent proof of knowledge that the instrument is forged.’ ””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pfleging v. State · Burks v. State

2. ““1. “Our law provides that a person commits an offense if he forges a writing with intent to defraud or harm another. Forgery is committed by altering, making, completing, executing, or authenticating any writing so that it purports to be the act of another who did not authorize that act. The offense of forgery is also committed by possessing a writing that is forged within the meaning of the preceding sentence with the intent to utter it, when the person so possessing it did so with knowledge that it was forged and with the intent to defraud and harm. “2. “The possession of a forged writing with intent to utter, to constitute a forgery, must be done with intent to defraud or harm another, but it is not required, to constitute such offense, that the person in committing it intended to defraud or harm any particular person, or that any particular person was defrauded or harmed by the forgery. It is sufficient if it appears that someone might be injured or defrauded thereby, but the jury must believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the intent of the person was to defraud or harm some person by the means alleged.””

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

3. ““(a) For purposes 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; [[Image here]] “(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; or “(C) to possess a writing that is forged within the meaning of Paragraph (A) with intent to utter it in a manner specified in Paragraph (B) of this subdivision. “(2) ‘Writing includes: “(A) printing or any other method of recording information; * * * * * * “(b) A person commits an offense if he forges a writing with intent to defraud or harm another. * * * * * * “(d) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the writing is or purports to be a will, codicil, deed, deed of trust, mortgage, security instrument, security agreement, credit card, check or similar sight order for payment of money, contract, release, or other commercial instrument.””

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