Jeffers v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently October 2005 · most notably Nethery v. State (1985), Tompkins v. State (1987)
44 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 Thomas v. State · American Plant Food Corporation v. State · Helms v. State · Brasfield v. State · McManus 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The essence of each of the eight offenses, as alleged in the indictments, was appellant’s act in receiving a bet and offer to bet by a named individual. The indictments fail to specify the manner by which appellant received the bets and offers to bet. Such items could have been received a number of ways including: in person, through a third party, over the telephone, at a drop or through the mail. We fail to see in what manner the State sought to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant received bets and offers to bet by an individual, without adducing facts which described how the receipt took place. Appellant’s motion to quash entitled him to the allegation of facts sufficient to bar a subsequent prosecution for the same offense and sufficient to give him precise notice of the offense with which he was charged. We conclude the trial court erred in overruling appellant’s motion to quash. Under such circumstances the indictments will be dismissed. Brasfield v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 600 S.W.2d 288 .” (Emphasis supplied.)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Castillo v. State · Smith v. State“"To require evidence reflected in a statement of facts to establish insufficient notice is to ignore the requirement that notice appear on the face of the indictment. Examination of the indictment, not the evidence is the ultimate test."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Herring v. State · Pannell v. State““intentionally and knowingly receive a bet and offer to bet by RICHARD L. BENTON on ... a [named] professional football game ....””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. State · Doyle 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.