Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 605 SW2D 550 - Young v. State

Young v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
February 2014
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Cumbie v. State · Robinson v. State · Hart v. State · Garcia v. State · Fella 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Now, if you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the 28th day of July, A.D. 1976, in Andrews County, Texas, the Defendant, John Hall Jefcoat, did then and there intentionally cause the death of an individual, Mary Jefcoat, by shooting her with a gun, or that the Defendant did then and there intend to cause serious bodily injury to the said Mary Jefcoat, and with said intent to cause such injury did commit an act clearly dangerous to human life, to-wit: shooting the said Mary Jefcoat with a gun and causing the death of the said Mary Jefcoat, and you further find and believe from all the facts and circumstances in evidence in this case, the Defendant, in killing the deceased, if he did, acted under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause, as those terms have been defined, then you will find the Defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Unless you so find beyond a reasonable doubt, or if you have a reasonable doubt thereof, you will acquit the Defendant of the offense of voluntary manslaughter and consider whether he is guilty of the lesser offense of criminally negligent homicide.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “This charge authorized a conviction under theories of voluntary manslaughter pursuant to V.T.C.A., Penal Code Sec. 19.04(a) coupled with both Sec. 19.02(a)(1) and Sec. 19.02(a)(2), whereas the indictment was drafted under Sec. 19.02(a)(1) only. Thus the jury was authorized to convict appellant under a theory not included in the indictment. Under this Court's holdings in Garcia v. State , Tex. Cr.App., 574 S.W.2d 133 , and Fella v. State , Tex.Cr.App. 573 S.W.2d 548 , reversal is required. (Footnote omitted.) Id. at 551 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““... knowingly and intentionally cause the death of an individual, James Graham, by shooting him with a gun.” 8”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.