Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Appellant contends that the indictment is fundamentally defective for failing to allege all the essential elements of the offense of theft. We agree and reverse the judgment of conviction. “The offense was alleged to have occurred on February 18, 1975. At that time, V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Sec. 31.03 defined the offense of theft as follows: “ ‘(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to deprive the owner of property: “ ‘(1) he obtains the property unlawfully; or “ ‘(2) he exercises control over the property, other than real property, unlawfully. “ ‘(b) Obtaining or exercising control over property is unlawful if: “ ‘(1) the actor obtains or exercises control over the property without the owner’s effective consent; or “ ‘(2) the property is stolen and the actor obtains it from another or exercises control over the property obtained by another knowing it was stolen.’1 (Emphasis supplied.)””

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

2. ““1. Sec. 31.03, supra, was amended in 1975 and now provides: “ ‘(a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property. “ ‘(b) Appropriation of property is unlawful if: “ ‘(1) it is without the owner’s effective consent; or “ ‘(2) the property is stolen and the actor appropriates the property knowing it was stolen by another.’ (Emphasis supplied).””

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