Callins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2016 · most notably Cain v. South Carolina (1990), Jones v. State (1992)
4 federal appellate · 34 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 Davis v. Alaska · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Lockett v. Ohio · Wainwright v. Witt · Penry v. Lynaugh
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“has not made any showing that witness Henderson testified against him as a result of bias, motive or ill will emanating from his status of deferred adjudication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“First, it will be applicable to all cases where there is misjoinder of offenses. Second, it does not attempt to make arbitrary distinctions based on which allegation or conviction preceded the others. The outcome of a case will not depend on the coincidence of the order of offenses in an indictment or jury charge. Third, it assumes that if the State had been made to elect an offense, it would have chosen the most serious one. This will be true in a majority of the cases. It cannot be said that the State would usually pick the first offense. Last, it is the most consistent with the objective of the Penal Code "to insure the public safety through: (A) the deterrent influence of the penalties hereinafter provided." V.T.C.A. Penal Code, sec. 1.02.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Landers v. State“It occurs to us that there is no error shown by the court’s ruling because, (a) it is not made to appear that any of the other members of the jury panel heard the remark, (b) that if they did hear it, they were influenced thereby to the prejudice of appellant, (c) that the juror in question nor any other juror who may have had a similar opinion was forced upon appellant. In the absence of which no injury to him is shown.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ashcraft 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.