Ex Parte Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Heath v. State (1991), Robinson v. State (1987)
31 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 Ex Parte Crisp · Whitten v. State · Ex Parte McAtee · DeVary v. State · Taylor 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It was established there was an improper admonishment as to penalty, and ... there was a plea bargain, a plea bargain based upon the wrong range of punishment. Appellant alleged under oath he would not have entered the plea bargain if he had known the maximum penalty was only one-half of what he was told. * * * * * * “We conclude that applicant was not aware of the consequences of his plea, that he was harmed by the court’s admonishment, and further, under all the circumstances, the guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered.” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hurwitz v. State“In admonishing the defendant as herein provided, substantial compliance by the court is sufficient, unless the defendant affirmatively shows that he was not aware of the consequences of his plea and that he was misled or harmed by the admonishment of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cree v. State“there can be no question that the admonishment was not proper.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Gibauitch
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.