Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2016
10 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 United States v. Tucker · Burgett v. Texas · Loper v. Beto · Zillender v. State · Dovalina 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““attempt” means “intent” and the word “specific” is not essential to an indictment which alleges an offense requiring a “specific intent” for its mens rea. Further, although the reasoning of Williams v. State, 544 S.W.2d 428 (Tex.Cr.App. [1976]) is not directly in point, the same result should follow.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. State · Young v. State“"with intent to commit theft, did attempt to enter a habitation ... by prying on door of said habitation with a tire tool, without the effective consent of Complainant."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. State“clearly sets forth that the offense of attempted burglary was set forth in `plain and intelligible words.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young 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.