Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 573 S.W.2d 546 - Smith v. State

Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
October 1995
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Standley v. State · Ex Parte Roberts · Nitcholas v. State · Williams 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Here, as in [Nitcholas v. State, 524 S.W.2d 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1975) ], the indictment is sufficient to charge a felony theft although it fails to specify the upper limit of the value of the property. Although this failure would prohibit conviction for theft over $10,000 even if the State proved up this greater value, it does not render the indictment fundamentally defective in regard to alleging a theft less than $10,000 but over $200. Thus, we hold that the present indictment is not fundamentally defective.””
    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.