Conaway v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Daniels v. State (1988), United States v. Hinkle (2016)
1 federal appellate · 38 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 Ferguson v. State · Pitts v. State · Garza v. State · Medellin v. State · Aetna Insurance Co. v. Richardelle
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our law provides that a person commits an offense if she intentionally or knowingly delivers a controlled substance. Cocaine is a controlled substance. [[Image here]] By the term “deliver,” as used in this charge is meant that actual transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. [[Image here]] All persons are parties to an offense who are guilty of acting together in the commission of an offense. A person is criminally responsible as a party to an offense if the offense is committed by her own conduct or another for which she is criminally responsible. A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, she solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense. Each party to an offense may be charged with commission of the offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cano v. State““Sec. 4.05(a) Except as authorized by this Act, a person commits an offense if he knowingly or intentionally delivers marihuana. “(b) An offense under Subsection (a) of this section is: [[Image here]] “(3) a felony of the third degree if the amount of marihuana delivered is four ounces or less but more than one-fourth ounce[.]” “Sec. 1.02 “(8) ‘Deliver’ or ‘delivery’ means the actual or constructive transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance or drug paraphernalia, whether or not there is an agency relationship. For purposes of this Act, it also includes an offer to sell a controlled substance or drug paraphernalia.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Daniels v. State“As a matter of law, these are mutually exclusive ways in which delivery of a controlled substance might occur.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. MIHNOVICH 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.