Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 705 SW2D 739 - Maddox v. State

Maddox v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
October 1991
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Moore v. Illinois · Almanza v. State · Giles v. State of Maryland · United States v. Morell · United States v. Miller

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

  1. “"The law requires, effective January 1, 1984, that counties having a population over 25,000 (which includes Fort Bend County) maintain electronic devices capable of visually recording a person arrested for driving while intoxicated. It further provides that if a county is required to maintain such electronic equipment and a person arrested for driving while intoxicated in that county is not visually recorded, those facts are admissible at the trial of the one arrested. The statute imposes no other sanctions for the county's failure to maintain or use the video equipment. " (Emphasis added)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The fact that an arresting officer or other person acting on behalf of the state failed to visually record a person arrested for an offense listed in Subsection (a) of this section is admissible at the trial of the offense if the offense occurred in a county required to purchase and maintain electronic devices under this section.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.