Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 682 S.W.2d 620 - Borgen v. State

Borgen v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2019

6 state decisions

301984199020002010decided

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 Todd v. State · Romo v. State · Smith v. State · Borgen v. State · Pemberton 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The argument was calculated to and probably did give the impression to the jury that, no matter what it did, a higher court would ensure ultimate, perfect justice for [the] appellant, and that therefore [the jury] need not concern itself with assessing a punishment that it sincerely felt was proper. This was ... expressly contrary to our system of criminal justice, for it[,] in effect, told the jury that it could deal harshly with appellant at the punishment stage, rather than concerning itself with an honest effort to determine a proper punishment.”
    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.