Villarreal v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2006 · most notably Kothe v. State (2004), Blake v. State (1998)
25 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 Strunk v. United States · LeDuc v. Florida · Carrillo v. State · Villarreal v. State · Cooper 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the offense committed; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Arrizola v. State · Lane v. State“Herein lies the distinguishing point of Harris from this case. The girl in Harris was fifteen years old, and was subject to criminal culpability. Here, Dickey was eleven years old, and therefore could not have been certified and tried for murder. See V.T.C.A., Fam.Code sec. 54.-02(a)(2). Unlike Harris , there is nothing in the record to show there were any type of proceedings that were to be or had already been instituted against Dickey-”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ashford v. State“We cannot say that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that [the juvenile] was an accomplice witness as a matter of law. However, in light of the evidence set out below in detail, the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury to decide the fact question whether [the juvenile] was an accomplice witness [as a matter of fact] was reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blake v. State
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.