Tenery v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 state decisions

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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Whether the exception (i.e., intentional government overreaching) extends to situations where, as here, an earlier prosecution culminated in a jury verdict only to be set aside by an order of new trial is a matter of some doubt. The uncertainty arises from the established principle that ‘the successful appeal of a judgment of conviction, on any ground other than the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, poses no bar to further prosecution on the same charge.’ Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 , 98 S.Ct. 2141 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1 (1978); see Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 , 102 S.Ct. 2083 , 72 L.Ed.2d 416 (1982); United States v. DiFrancesco, 449 U.S. 117, 130-31 , 101 S.Ct. 426, 433-34 , 66 L.Ed.2d 328 (1980). Similarly, when the trial proceeds to its conclusion despite a legitimate claim of seriously prejudicial error, the Double Jeopardy Clause will present no obstacle to a retrial if the conviction is reversed on appeal. United States v, Dinitz, 424 U.S. 600 , 96 S.Ct. 1075 , 47 L.Ed.2d 267 (1976); United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662 , 16 S.Ct. 1192 , 41 L.Ed. 300 (1896); Durrough v. State, 620 S.W.2d 134, 139 (Tex.Crim.App.1981). “In the present case, the alleged prose-cutorial misconduct did not result in a mistrial. Appellant complains of the fol lowing jury argument by the prosecutor “Appellant contends on appeal that the granting of the new trial in appellant’s case was attributable to prosecutorial overreaching. Specifically, appellant contends that the ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Zimmerman v. State

2. “The offense of aggravated assault on a female is a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. Trippell v. State, 535 S.W.2d 178 (Tex.Crim.App.1976). However, in the present case, there was no evidence that the assault charges against [the witness] back in 1976 amounted to an aggravated assault. More importantly, even assuming the offense in question was shown to be one involving moral turpitude, the testimony elicited did not show that a final conviction had resulted.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hardeman v. State

3. “the successful appeal of a judgment of conviction, on any ground other than the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, poses no bar to further prosecution on the same charge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gonzalez v. State