Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 701 SW2D 895 - Robinson v. State

Robinson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
June 2007
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently June 2007 · most notably Montgomery v. State (1991), Allridge v. State (1988)

46 state decisions

240198519902000decided

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 United States v. Beechum · Albrecht v. State · Quinones v. State · Williams v. State · Plante 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘Without formulating any accurate test, and without attempting by numerous instances to secure absolute certainty of inference, the mind applies this rough and instinctive process of reasoning, namely, that an unusual and abnormal element might perhaps be present in one instance, but that the oftener similar instances occur with similar results, the less likely is the abnormal element likely to be the true explanation of them.’ ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I will just say this, you may think that the testimony was short from two witnesses that I put on the stand in the punishment stage but I submit to you that their testimony was very, very important for this reason, that those were the only questions I was allowed by law to ask that type of witness and (sic) this part of the trial — .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “On the other hand, Mr. Corbitt [defense attorney] could ask these witnesses upon what do they base their statements if he wanted to but no, I submit to you it is a reasonable deduction from the failure to ask those witnesses any questions that the answers would have been adverse to his client — .”
    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.