Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 711 SW2D 634 - Jones v. State

Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably Ex Parte Renier (1987), Ex Parte Chandler (2005)

50 state decisions

1701986199020002010decided

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 Benson v. State · Cooper v. State · Garza v. State · 132 Tex. Crim. 371 - Arbuckle v. State · Cain 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In this instance, because the sentence that was introduced into evidence by the State to prove up the alleged prior felony conviction reflects that the conviction was appealed, the State itself raised the question as to what disposition was made of the appeal. It thus had the burden of proof to establish what disposition was made of the appeal. Because the State failed to make a prima facia showing of finality, the appellant had no burden to carry.... The case is simply one of failure of the State to sustain its burden of proof.” Jones, 711 S.W.2d at 636 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a conviction from which an appeal has been taken is not considered to be a final conviction until the conviction is affirmed”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““1. Even though we have been made aware that the appellant’s prior conviction was affirmed by this Court in an unpublished per curiam opinion [citation omitted], in which this Court’s mandate issued on December 15, 1975, and was executed on January 13, 1976, because ‘We decline to review the records of another case to find support for contentions raised in this appeal’ [citation omitted], we will not consider the record of that appeal, [citations omitted]””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.