Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 582 SW2D 146 - Putnam v. State

Putnam v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
November 1995
most recently cited

17 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Boyce Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States · Sproles v. Binford · Smith v. Davis · Board of Water Eng of State v. Cty of San Antonio · Central Education Agency v. Independent School District

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

  1. ““The evidence adduced in the hearing that the appellant did commit another offense while on bail far exceeds the statutory requirement that the court find only that he is likely to commit another offense while on bail ...””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[Prosecutor]: Your Honor, Art. 44.04 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sets out the bond on appeals. Under that section the Court can even deny bail and commit the defendant to custody if the sentence is less than 15 years if he has good cause to believe that the defendant would not appear. It appears that Mr. Harris does make his court appearances. But also if the Court has good cause to believe that the defendant is likely to commit another offense while out on bail. I believe that the criminal history that Mr. Harris has admitted to would prove to the Court beyond a reasonable doubt that he is likely to commit another offense. [[Image here]] I think the Court it [sic] wise in setting a very high bond in this case to keep him from going out and committing another offense, and the Court has good cause to believe that it’s likely he would do that. [[Image here]] THE COURT: I think because of his bad record, I just wouldn't feel right in lowering the bond any. I’d hate to put that upon the citizens of Travis County. Maybe the Court of Appeals will, but at least that won’t be on my back. I just feel a duty to the community to protect the community. If he’d get out and kill someone, I’d never get over it. I’d rather see him in jail than to see someone’s life taken, so I’m going to deny the writ and let you go on up to the Court of Appeals and see what they do about it. I just wouldn’t feel right with this horrible record.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is well established that when the title of an original act embraces matters covered by an amendment, the title or caption of the amendment need not state the subject of the law amended or specify the nature of the proposed amendment, but new substantive matter in the amendment, not germane to the provision amended, is invalid as legislation on matters not expressed in the title of the amendatory act.””
    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.