Dovalina v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently January 2002 · most notably Pitts v. State (1978), Lugo-Lugo v. State (1983)
2 federal appellate · 47 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 Day v. State · Garcia v. State · 157 Tex. Crim. 266 - Daywood v. State · McBrayer v. State · Simon 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A person commits an offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended.” (emphasis added)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Flanagan v. State · Sears v. State““The word ‘attempt’ is a word of more comprehensive meaning than the word ‘intent’ and includes the latter; . . . ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lopez v. State · Telfair v. State““In situations such as this, to avoid possible variance, an indictment could be presented alleging in the conjunctive ‘all possible means of doing the killing, including with an instrument to the Grand Jury unknown.’ Proof of one of the means would suffice. See Heinous v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 437 (1965), and Burt v. State, 38 Tex.Cr.R. 397 , 40 S.W. 1000 .” See also Dovalina v. State, 564 S.W.2d 378 (Tex.Cr.App.1978).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Zanghetti 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.