Ware v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2010
12 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 Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · United States v. Bell
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the instant affidavit, the affiant states only that she has personal knowledge that appellant threatened to commit the offense of retaliation. No information is given to the means by which the affiant obtained the information, or the underlying circumstances surrounding its acqui sition. The affidavit simply fails to relate any facts upon which a magistrate could determine that an offense had been committed. As such, it is invalid under either the ‘totality of the circumstances’ test according to Gates, supra, or the more stringent Aguilar-Spinelli test. Since the affidavit is insufficient, the trial court erred by permitting evidence obtained as a result of appellant’s arrest to be introduced. The Court of Appeals erred in finding that the affidavit was sufficient. Ware v. State, 724 S.W.2d 38, 41 (Tex.Cr.App.1986)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ware 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.