Ex Parte Wheeler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “Appellant, on trial for manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, did not dispute that she drove the car that struck [the victim], so the only question before the jury was whether she “acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully.” Questioning [her expert]’s knowledge of the results of an insurance investigation both disclosed the existence of insurance coverage and informed the jury that others had independently determined that appellant had acted negligently or recklessly. We hold that the prosecutor, necessarily being acquainted with our rules of evidence, should have known that his question crossed “the line between legitimate adversarial gamesmanship and manifestly improper methods” and created a substantial risk that a mistrial would result. See Bauder II [Ex parte Bauder ], 974 S.W.2d [729 (Tex.Cr.App.1998) ] at 732. Having held that the prosecutor intentionally or recklessly caused the trial to end in a mistrial, we sustain appellant’s sole point. 3”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Wheeler

2. “Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether the person acted. negligently or otherwise wrongfully. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when offered for another issue, such as proof of agency, ownership, or control, if disputed, or bias or prejudice of a witness.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Wheeler