Palafox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 69 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently February 2003 · most notably Nobles v. Johnson (1997), Moody v. State (1992)
2 federal appellate · 69 state decisions
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 Chambers v. Mississippi · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Brown v. State · Chambers v. State · Jones 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here the state puts in evidence the statements of the accused party which exculpates [sic] the accused, and does not directly or indirectly disprove them, the accused is entitled to an acquittal.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. State · County v. State“[t]hen and there intentionally cause the death of MARY MILLIGAN, an individual, hereinafter called the deceased, by strangling the deceased with his hands, and by strangling the deceased with a means, the exact nature and description of which is unknown to the Grand Jurors, and by drowning the deceased in a bathtub containing water, and the defendant intentionally did cause the death of the deceased while the said defendant was in the course of committing and attempting to commit the offense of burglary of a habitation of which the deceased was the owner, and while the said defendant was in the course of committing and attempting to commit the offense of robbery of the deceased.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Boyd v. State“That the State is bound by exculpatory statements contained in the confession which it offers in evidence rests on a rule that, by introducing the confession into evidence, the State vouches for its credibility. Thus, the rule exists as a variant of the broader “voucher” rule, which is itself a rationalization for the rule against impeaching one’s own witness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Samples v. State
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.