Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 579 SW2D 499 - Waldon v. State

Waldon v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
2
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently August 2012 · most notably McGoldrick v. State (1985), Dubry v. State (1979)

44 state decisions

32019791980199020002010decided

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 Burks v. United States · Greene v. Massey · Flores v. State · Hernandez v. State · Payne 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is also well established that a conviction based on circumstantial evidence cannot be sustained if the circumstances do not exclude every other reasonable hypothesis except that of the guilt of the accused, and proof amounting only to a strong suspicion or mere probability is insufficient. Stogsdill v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 552 S.W.2d 481 ; Flores v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 551 S.W.2d 364 ; Easley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 529 S.W.2d 522 ; Indo v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 502 S.W.2d 166 . This is especially significant when the night watchman was in the terminal area with a view of the runway and plane parking area and could have shed light on the missing facts of this case. “Where circumstantial evidence relied on by the prosecution is somewhat weak and where the record on appeal affirmatively shows not only that other testimony which would have cast additional light on the facts was available to the prosecution, but also that the prosecution did not introduce such other evidence or satisfactorily account for its failure to do so, the appellant court will treat the case as one showing reasonable doubt of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction. Schershel v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 575 S.W.2d 548 ; King v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 396 S.W.2d 409 ; 24 Tex.Jur.2d 427, Evidence, Section 745.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Possession means more than being where the action is; it involves the exercise of dominion and control over the thing allegedly possessed.” ... Whether the case is tried on the theory of joint or sole possession, the evidence must affirmatively link the accused to the drug he is alleged to have possessed.”
    4 later decisions 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.