Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 741 SW2D 435 - Scott v. State

Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 2010
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 2010

7 state decisions

401987199020002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Houston v. State · Wilson v. State · Porras v. Craig · Sullivan 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “When the owner of the property is testifying as to the value of the property, he or she may testify as to his or her opinion or estimate of the value of the property in general and commonly understood terms. The testimony of this nature is an offer of the witness’ best knowledge of the value of his property. Such testimony will constitute sufficient evidence for the trier of fact to make a determination as to value based on the witness’ credibility. This is true even in the absence of a specific statement as to “market value” or “replacement value.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[The judge] says you are instructed that the value of personal property — and I guess the personal property we’re talking about is the receiver, the turntable, as well as the cassette — you are instructed that the value of personal property is the fair market value of the property or services at the time and place of the offense. We’re talking about May the 22nd of 1989. That’s what we’re talking about, the value of the property at that time. [The prosecutor]: I have to object. That’s not the complete definition of value. The option of completeness. If he’s going to read a paragraph of it, read all of it. [The Court]: The objection is overruled. You have the opportunity in closing. [Prosecutor]: Thank you, sir. [Appellant’s attorney]: The judge read you two definitions of value. I will explain why I don’t believe the second defi nition applies at all. I will get to No. 2, but back to — you are instructed that the value of personal property is the fair market value of the property or services at the time and place of the offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.