Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 S.W.2d 120 - Pearson v. State

Pearson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on King v. State · Honeycutt v. State · Fry v. State · Hardison v. State · Maloy 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We hold Article 14.04 (V.A.C.C.P.) does not require a showing that the offender in fact was about to escape, nor does it require a showing that there in fact was no time to procure a warrant. The statute merely requires a showing that the officer was acting upon satisfactory proof from representations by a credible person that the felony offender is about to escape, so that there is no time to procure a warrant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where it is shown by satisfactory proof to a peace officer, upon the representation of a credible person, that a felony has been committed, and that the offender is about to escape, so that there is no time to procure a warrant, such peace officer may, without warrant, pursue and arrest the accused.”
    1 later decision 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.