Yee v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the witness was present and ready to testify; (2) the request to reopen was made before the charge was read to the jury and final arguments were made; (3) the court had some indication of what the testimony would have been, and was satisfied that the testimony was material and bore directly on the main issues in the case; and, (4) there was no showing that introduction of the testimony would have impeded the trial or interfered with the orderly administration of justice.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lucious v. State · Sims v. State

2. ““Whether a trial court should permit additional testimony after the evidence is closed is left to the sound discretion of the trial court. There is absolutely no showing of what testimony appellant would have given had the trial judge permitted him to reopen. Appellant has therefore not complied with TEX. R.APP.P. 52(b). The majority excuses appellant’s failure to perfect a bill of exception on the issue because “it appears obvious that any defendant’s testimony could be material and bear directly on the main issues of the case.” I am not aware of any authority permitting an appellate court to presume the existence of excluded testimony in order to find an abuse of discretion by the trial court in failing to permit the evidence to be reopened so that testimony could be heard.” (emphasis in the original).”

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