Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Dewberry v. State (1999), Curry v. State (2000)
70 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 Albrecht v. State · Thomas v. State · Griffin v. State · Burrell v. State · Reynolds 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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the event a portion of this evidence was erroneously admitted, the accused may complain on appeal of such error. If his complaint has merit and the error is reversible, see Rule 81(b)(2), Tex.R.App. Proe., a new trial should be ordered. But jurors do not act irrationally taking such evidence into account, since they are bound to receive the law from the trial judge. All evidence which the trial judge has ruled admissible may therefore be weighed and considered by the jury, and a reviewing court is obliged to assess the jury’s factual findings from this perspective.” (emphasis added).”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“• creating or confirming by words or conduct a false impression of law or fact that is likely to affect the judgment of another in the transaction, and that the actor does not believe to be true; [or] ... • promising performance that is likely to affect the judgment of another in the transaction and that the actor does not intend to perform or knows will not be performed, except that failure to perform the promise in issue without other evidence of intent or knowledge is not sufficient proof that the actor did not intend to perform or knew the promise would not be performed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]here an indictment alleges that some relevant event transpired `on or about' a particular date, the accused is put on notice to prepare for proof that the event happened at any time within the statutory period of limitations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sledge 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.