Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 752 SW2D 529 - Rose v. State

Rose v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

402
cited by 402 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 386 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 402 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Harris v. State (1989), Marin v. State (1993)

2 federal appellate · 386 state decisions

21601988199020002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2117

Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · In the Matters of Lee Roy Murchison and John Whites · Gardner v. Florida · Lisenba v. People of State of California

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

  1. “If the appellate record in a criminal case reveals error in the proceedings below, the appellate court shall reverse the judgment under review, unless the appellate court determines beyond a reasonable doubt that the error made no contribution to the conviction or to the punishment.”
    52 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “You are not to discuss among yourselves how long the accused would be required to serve the sentence that you impose. Such matters come within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Board of Pardons and Paroles and the Governor of the State of Texas, and must not be considered by you.”
    28 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “You may consider the existence of the parole law and good conduct time. However, you are not to consider the extent to which good conduct time may be awarded to or forfeited by this particular defendant. You are not to consider the manner in which the parole law may be applied to this particular defendant.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.