Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 777 SW2D 44 - Murphy v. State

Murphy v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

80 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Mayes v. State (1991), Grunsfeld v. State (1992)

80 state decisions

4801989199020002010decided

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 · Williams v. State · Boutwell v. State · Plante v. State · Moore 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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) Regardless of the plea and whether the punishment be assessed by the judge or the jury, evidence may be offered by the state and the defendant as to the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation and his character. We agree with appellant that both excerpts quoted above are inadmissible under former article 37.07, section 3(a); therefore we need not address appellant's contention that the first excerpt is inadmissible under rule 410 of the Texas Rules of Criminal Evidence.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Regardless of the plea and whether the punishment be assessed by the judge or the jury, evidence may, as permitted by the Rules of Evidence, be offered by the state and the defendant as to any matter the court deems relevant to sentencing, including the prior criminal record of the defendant, his general reputation and his character.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Whether the fact that an accused has committed criminal acts in the past makes it arguably less probable that he or she will follow the law in the future, is a question best decided on a case by case basis according to the facts of each case. It may, for instance, be more probative if the extraneous offense was committed by a defendant after charges were brought against him.”
    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.