Wallace v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Robert Wallace raised an issue contending that he was entitled to an evi-dentiary hearing on his Motion for New Trial. The majority opinion does not address this matter, but rather addresses whether he is entitled to a new trial. Counsel duly requested a hearing on the Motion for New Trial. The record indicates that no evidentiary hearing was held and the Motion for New Trial was overruled. The defendant need only assert reasonable grounds for relief that are not determinable from the record in order to be entitled to a hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to fully develop the issues raised in the motion. Prior to the trial, two of the trial witnesses had stated that “Billy” had committed the assault in question, but they later changed their stories to say that Wallace had committed the assault. The affidavit of Donna Marshall states that Billy Ray Williams had told her that he had called an attorney in Fort Worth to determine whether he would “get jail time” if he confessed, and he stated that the lawyer had stated he would go to jail and advised against confessing. Although this is not a direct admission by Williams that he had committed the assault in question, it raises a strong inference. The affidavit clearly shows that this statement was made to Marshall after Wallace had been convicted on the assault charges. She further stated Williams had told her he moved to another town right after this incident had occurred and had come right back after the conviction of Wallac”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Wallace v. State