Ex Parte Adams’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
75 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2025 · most notably Murray v. Giarratano (1989), McFarland v. State (1992)
75 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 Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Bagley · United States v. Agurs
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... Where the ruling of the trial judge depends upon the existence or non-existence of a certain fact and testimony pro and con is introduced thereon and the evidence is conflicting it becomes the duty of the trial judge to determine the issue, and unless it appears to this court that his finding was without support in the evidence, and that he had committed an error in his judgment thereon, we would not interfere with his findings thereon. Glenn v. State, 89 Tex.Cr.R. 13 , 229 S.W. 521 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[E]vidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex parte Carty · Ex parte Lalonde“A 'reasonable probability' is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex parte Carty · Ex parte Lalonde
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.