Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “Articles 44.33(a) and 44.45(c) authorize this Court to make rules of posttrial and appellate procedure for hearing criminal actions not inconsistent with remaining provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, including promulgating rules to implement its discretionary review jurisdiction, power and authority. In 1981 this Court did indeed adopt and promulgate Rules of Post Trial and Appellate Procedure in Criminal Cases. (Internal citation omitted.) See also, Herrin v. State, 668 S.W.2d 896, 897 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1984) (holding Court of Criminal Appeals has rule-making authority to enlarge the time for filing a petition for discretionary review).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex Parte Wilson

2. “As I do, the Austin Court will surely wonder what is the “good cause shown,” and since presumably it must invite and afford time for the parties to brief the Adams question, the Austin Court would be justified in believing that to review the record again for prejudice to preparation of a defense is certainly not “in the interest of expediting a decision” in this cause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Oldham v. State