Van Guilder v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 1989
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 144th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Angrist v. United States · Maryland Casualty Co. v. Hearks · White v. State · Graham v. State · Madrid 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Jurors may reject the opinion of experts if it does not comport with their ideas of sound logic ... Jurors are not required to give conclusive effect to the opinion of experts, but they may not arbitrarily disregard such testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Van Guilder v. State“someone told me they were after me ... someone told me I had to save the children. I had to go down there and get them. They were hurting the children. I had to stop it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Van Guilder v. State“great weight and preponderance of the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Van Guilder 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.