Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 586 SW2D 851 - Ex Parte McIver

Ex Parte McIver’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Collins v. Youngblood (1990), State v. Roberts (1996)

51 state decisions

14019791980199020002010decided

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 County of Harris v. Crooker · Smith v. State · TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS IN OPTOMETRY v. Carp · Jones v. State · Batten 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[T]he express mention or enumeration of one person, thing, consequence, or class is tantamount to an express exclusion of all others.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “and the defendant having requested that the jury assess the punishment, evidence was presented to the same jury in the matter of assessing punishment. The same jury after hearing all the evidence presented by the State and the defendant for the purpose of assessing punishment, and after having heard argument of counsel, again retired in charge of the proper officer to consider of the verdict, and afterward were again brought into court by the proper officer, the defendant and his counsel being present, and in due form of law returned into open court the following verdict, which was received by the Court and is here now entered upon the minutes of the Court, to-wit: [w]e, the jury, having found the defendant, Albert Lawrence Rodgers, guilty of the offense of Rape do further find that the said defendant is the same person, who prior to the commission of that offense, had been convicted of the felony offense in Cause No. 51,-951 as alleged in the indictment, and we assess his punishment at confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections for a term of 12 years.... It is therefore CONSIDERED AND ADJUDGED by the court that the defendant Albert Lawrence Rodgers is guilty of the offense of Rape as charged in the first paragraph of the indictment, and that each and all of the allegations set out in the second paragraph of the indictment charging a final conviction for the offense of burglary of a building, are true as found by the jury, and that punishment be fixed as determined by”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is, therefore, Considered and Adjudged by the Jury that the defendant ... be punished by confinement ... for a term of not more than five (5) years nor less than two (2) years, and a fine in the amount of $5,000.00 with recommendation the fine be probated.””
    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.