McKee v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
February 2004
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Almanza v. State · Hayes v. State · Williams v. State · Stone v. State · Seefurth 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This article is mandatory and there must be strict compliance with its provisions to warrant review [by the appellate court], (citations omitted). The real purpose of this enactment is to enable the trial judge to know in what respect the defendant regards the charge as defective and to afford him an opportunity to correct it before reading the charge to the jury, (citations omitted). This article serves a statutory purpose in preventing the trial judge from being “sand-bagged” and in preventing unnecessary reversals, (citations omitted). It is a statute which the courts can neither ignore nor emasculate, (citation omitted). Thus[,] as a predicate for complaint to a jury charge on appeal[,] the accused is required to distinctly specify each ground of objection, (citation omitted). To constitute a valid objection to jury instructions, the objection must be specific and clear enough to apprise the trial court of the nature of the objection, (citations omitted). If the objection is not specific enough, nothing is presented for review, (citations omitted). It is clear then that a general objection which does not distinctly specify the claimed error in the charge is not sufficient to preserve error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Wallace v. State“Before said charge is read to the jury, the defendant or his counsel shall have a reasonable time to examine the same and he shall present his objections thereto in writing, distinctly specifying each ground of objection. Said objections may embody errors claimed to have been committed in the charge, as well as errors claimed to have been committed by omissions therefrom or in failing to charge upon issues arising from the facts, and in no event shall it be necessary for the defendant or his counsel to present special requested charges to preserve or maintain any error assigned to the charge, as herein provided. The requirement that the objection to the court’s charge be in writing will be complied with if the objections are dictated to the court reporter in the presence of the court and the state’s counsel before the reading of the court’s charge to the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Wallace 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.