Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 791 SW2D 80 - Cooper v. State

Cooper v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Zillender v. State · Henry v. State · Armstrong v. State · Ortega 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In order to preserve a complaint for appellate review, a party must have presented to the trial court a timely request, objection or motion, stating the specific grounds for the ruling he desired the court to make if the specific grounds were not apparent from the context. It is also necessary for the complaining party to obtain a ruling on the party’s request, objection or motion. If the trial judge refuses to rule, an objection to the court’s refusal to rule is sufficient to preserve the complaint. It is not necessary to formally except to the rulings or orders of the trial court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... for appellate puiposes the State has no obligation at the trial level to make a contemporaneous objection to appellant’s failure to make a contemporaneous objection. The fact ffiat &e trial court proceeded to conduct a Batson hearing is irrelevant to the issue of whether the appellant actually preserved error. The State’s obligation is to bring to the appellate court's attention the fact that the appellant was dilatory in preserving error for appellate review.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “appellant’s Batson issue was properly before th[e] court for review where the motion was filed prior to the dismissal of the venire, where the prosecutor failed to object to the untimeliness of the motion and where the trial court held a hearing on the motion.”
    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.