Beddoe v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An Act relating to a speedy trial of criminal cases; amending the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1965, as amended, by adding Chapter 32A, by adding Articles 17.151 and 28.061, and by amending Articles 29.02 and 29.03; providing for an effective date; and declaring an emergency.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Massey v. State · Morgan v. State

2. “Prior to the enactment of Chapter 32A, an accused had two constitutional speedy trial rights: a federal constitutional right guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and a state constitutional right guaranteed by Article I, sec. 10 of the Texas Constitution. Ostoja v. State, 631 S.W.2d 165, 167 (Tex.Crim.App.1982). The only possible remedy for a violation of these rights was the dismissal of prosecution. Turner v. State, 545 S.W.2d 133, 139 (Tex.Crim.App.1977). The addition of Article 28.061 to the Code of Criminal Procedure established a statutory remedy identical to the remedy afforded in the case of a violation of a defendant’s constitutional speedy trial rights. The caption set forth above cannot be construed as obscuring the purpose of Chapter 32A from legislators or citizens and is sufficient to give an average reasonable caption reader notice that he will find new matter in the body of the bill. Providing a sanction for failure of the state to provide the “speedy trial of criminal cases” has a logical relationship to the general purpose of Chapter 32A. The caption tells the reader that the Act is to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure and this word means a change in the law. See Ex parte Crisp, 661 S.W.2d 944, 950 (Tex.Crim.App.1983). We, therefore, hold the caption of Chapter 32A does not violate the provision of Article III, Sec. 35 of the Texas Constitution. [Emphasis in original.]”

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

3. “Comes now, JUAN MARTINEZ, Defendant in the above styled and numbered cause, by and through his attorney, and moves the Court to dismiss this case for failure to afford the Defendant a speedy trial herein and as grounds therefore (sic) would show the Court as follows: I. That the indictment in this cause was returned by the Bexar County Grand Jury on the 15th day of April, 1981, wherein it is alleged that the Defendant committed the offense of attempted murder on or about the 22nd day of December, 1980. II. That the Defendant was arrested on the 22nd day of December, 1980. III. That this case has been pending on the docket of this Court for five (5) months since the date of Defendant’s arrest. That there are no satisfactory reasons for the delay in prosecution of the Defendant. The Defendant has never waived his right to a speedy trial. IV. That the failure of the State to afford the Defendant herein a speedy trial has violated the Defendant’s constitutional rights under the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of Texas and Articles 1.03, 1.04, and 1.05 C.C.P. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Defendant respectfully prays that this Honorable Court will set this matter down for a hearing and after said hearing that this Court will order this case dismissed.”

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