Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 751 SW2D 663 - Richardson v. State

Richardson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
August 1996
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 182nd Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Almanza v. State · Sharp v. State · Lambright v. Arizona · Carlsen 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. “Q. Mr. Capps, the next to the last question [Defense counsel] just asked you was whether you testified last time in a substantially similar way to the way you testified this time. Do you remember that question? A. Yes, ma’am. Q. Your answer was “yes,” wasn’t it? A. Yes, ma’am. Q. In fact, there is major [sic] difference in the way you testified so far and the way you testified last time? A. There is some left out. Q. You left out something that you said last time, didn’t you? A. I wasn’t asked. Q. And that something that you said last time that you didn't say this time is what got you charged with perjury? A. I really don’t know. Q. You’re telling the jury you don’t know why you were charged with perjury? A. I am telling you my ignorance of the law has nothing to do with it. Q. You remember pleading guilty to your two cases, don’t you? A. Yes, ma’am. Q. In fact, you pled guilty in front of this Judge right here, correct? A. Yes, ma’am. Q. And at the time that you pled guilty, portions of the paper work that you pled guilty to and signed said, “I committed this offense along with Harold Kelly and [appellant],” did they not? A. Repeat that? Q. At the time you entered your pleas of guilty, the papers that you signed and executed said, among other things, “I committed this offense along with Harold Kelly and [appellant],” did they not? A. I couldn’t testify they was [sic] there, no, ma’am. Q. In fact, last time you claimed that writing was not there, didn’t you? A. I didn’t see i”
    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.