McGee v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

61 state decisions

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

1. “There is ample evidence that appellant committed a robbery either during or immediately after the commission of the murder. Crosby was found dead, brutally beaten, and his wallet and car were missing. Andrew Sells testified that he and his friends saw appellant leaving Crosby’s rental home in Crosby’s car shortly after the time of the alleged murder. Appellant, who earlier that day borrowed a dollar for a can of Skoal, purchased clothing and jewelry for himself and his girlfriend later that evening. ... While there is not evidence that appellant demanded money or property from Crosby before attacking him with the hammer, such evidence is not the talisman of an intent to steal; the intent may be inferred from the actions or conduct of appellant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cooper v. State

2. “1) Do you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the conduct of the defendant that caused the death of the deceased was committed deliberately and with the reasonable expectation that the death of the deceased or another would result? 2) Do you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society? 3)Do you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the conduct of the defendant in killing the deceased was unreasonable in response to the provocation, if any, by the deceased? See Article 37.071(b), V.A.C.C.P.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Ex Parte McGee

3. “See also, e.g., Smith v. State, 676 S.W.2d 379, at 387 (Tex.Cr.App.1984); Smith v. State, 683 S.W.2d 393, at 401, n. 5 (Tex.Cr. App.1984); Vanderbilt v. State, 629 S.W.2d 709 (Tex.Cr.App.1981). Having granted this discretion to trial courts, however, it seems to me we turn around and effectively revoke it when we continually conclude our discussions on these points of error with holdings that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Drinkard v. State