Ex Parte Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2016 · most notably Collins v. Youngblood (1990), Speth v. State (1999)
2 federal appellate · 44 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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Anderson · Livingston v. Texas · Mellinger v. City of Houston (Tex. 1-18-1887) · Granviel 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) If the jury assesses punishment in a case and in the verdict assesses both punishment that is authorized by law for the offense and punishment that is not authorized by law for the offense, the court shall reform the verdict to show the punishment authorized by law and to omit the punishment not authorized by law. If the trial court is required to reform a verdict under this subsection and fails to do so, the appellate court shall reform the verdict as provided by this subsection.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Casey v. State · Bennett v. State“If the jury assesses punishment in a case and in the verdict assesses both punishment that is authorized by law for the offense and punishment that is not authorized by law for the offense, the court shall reform the verdict to show the punishment authorized by law and to omit the punishment not authorized by law. If the trial court is required to reform a verdict under this subsection and fails to do so, the appellate court shall reform the verdict as provided by this subsection.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Vance v. State · Reed v. State“the lack of a specific vehicle by which the improper verdict could be reformed.”
2 later decisions 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.