Easterling v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably Allridge v. State (1988), Marquez v. State (1987)
42 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 Polk v. State · O'BRYAN v. State · McManus v. State · Passmore v. State · Bradley 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The record does not contain either the original jury list which shows the names of jurors called for jury duty, nor does it include the juror information sheets which were filled out by those who appeared for jury duty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where the jury is the trier of fact, the trial court may not properly enter that they have made an affirmative finding concerning the defendant’s use or exhibition of a deadly weapon or firearm during the commission of the offense unless: 1) the deadly weapon has been specifically plead as such (using the nomenclature ‘deadly weapon’) in the indictment. (Applies where the verdict reads, ‘guilty as charged in the indictment.’ See Barecky [v. State, 639 S.W.2d 943 (Tex.Cr.App.1982) ], supra.) 2) where not specifically pled in ‘1)’ above as a deadly weapon or firearm, the weapon pled is per se a deadly weapon or a firearm; or 3) a special issue is submitted and answered affirmatively, (emphasis in original)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Willmann v. State“The charge reads in pertinent part: Therefore, if you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Mario Marquez, did, in Bexar County, Texas, on or about the 27th day of January, A.D., 1984, intentionally cause the death of an individual, namely, Rachel Gutierrez, by strangling the said Rachel Gutierrez with a ligature, and the said Mario Marquez did then and there intentionally cause the death of the said Rachel Gutierrez while in the course of committing or attempting to commit the offense of aggravated sexual assault upon Rachel Gutierrez, you will find the defendant guilty of capital murder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Marquez 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.