Arnold v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2011
7 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Thomas v. State · Anderson v. State · Manges v. Guerra · Sanne 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In general our courts permit a witness to testify as to his own intention or other state of mind where the same is material. * * * On the other hand decisions purporting to apply the opinion rule, uniformly exclude the testimony of a witness as to another person’s state of mind. It is said that since one person cannot possibly know another’s state of mind, his testimony is necessarily based on conjecture. This argument really invokes the rule requiring the witness to have personal knowledge of the matter about which he is to testify.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Arnold v. State“At least ten days before the date set for trial or other hearing in any court ... any party may file with the clerk of the court a motion stating grounds why the judge before whom the case is pending should not sit in the case. Tex.R.Civ.P. 18a(a).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sanchez 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.