Banks v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014 · most notably Banks v. Dretke Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutions Division (2004), Livingston v. State (1987)
1 federal appellate · 70 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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Sheppard v. Maxwell · Adams v. Texas · Kissinger v. Halperin · United Mine Workers, Local No. 1854 v. National Labor Relations Board
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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“And let’s talk about the coffee table. Will you assume? Will you suppose the manner in which she, according to the Defendant, ran and fell and hit the coffee table? Did anybody get up on the stand and tell you, members of the jury, “I saw her ran — run. I saw her fall, and then I saw her hit the table, and I saw the top of her head hit the table on the corner.”? You’re going to guess that? MR. LANE: Objection, Judge. I believe that’s possibly a comment on the Defendant’s failure to testify, and I object. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. LANE: Please note our exception. MR. DIES: Are you going to assume those facts? You have to. You do. MR. LANE: Again, Judge— MR. DIES: You have to guess the manner in which— MR. LANE: I object as being a comment. I renew my objection, Judge, the last comment of the prosecutor. THE COURT: Overruled.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“`manifestly intended or of such a character that the jury would necessarily and naturally take it as a comment on the accused's failure to testify.' ... A mere indirect or implied illusion to the accused's failure to testify does not violate appellant's rights. A remark that calls attention to the absence of evidence which only the defendant could supply will result in reversal; however, if the language can reasonably be construed to refer to appellant's failure to produce evidence other than his own testimony, the comment is not improper.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. State · Dixon v. State“decided to kill the [deceased] for the hell of it and take his automobile to Dallas”
2 later decisions 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.