Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 Tex. Crim. 185 - Howard v. State

77 Tex. Crim. 185 - Howard v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
3
states following
August 1985
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently August 1985

3 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

5019151920193019401950196019701980decided

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.

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

  1. ““Only the general or ultimate object is required to be stated in the title, and not the details by which the object is to be attained. Any provision calculated to carry the declared object into effect is admissible.’’”
    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.