Martin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““On appeal additional challenges to the lawfulness of the search are raised. It is asserted that Kimberly did not have authority to consent to a search of the room appellant occupied in the house. Some of the evidence was seized in his room and some in other parts of the house. No objection was made at trial directing the court’s attention specifically to those items seized from appellant’s room, nor was objection made to Kimberly’s authority to consent to a search of that particular room. Consequently, the record was not developed with attention on this issue. Nothing is presented for review in this matter. See Morrison v. State, [Tex.Cr.App.] 508 S.W.2d 827, n. 4 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lackey v. State

2. ““At trial appellant filed a motion to suppress the seized evidence and the identification testimony on the theory that the search was conducted without a warrant and without consent.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lackey v. State