Allen v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “There is nothing improper about the practice of allowing occasional questions from jurors to be asked of witnesses. If a juror is unclear as to a point in the proof, it makes good common sense to allow a question to be asked about it. If nothing else, the question should alert trial counsel that a particular factual issue may need more extensive development. Trials exist to develop the truth.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fazzino v. Guido · Morrison v. State

2. “1. After both lawyers had concluded their respective direct and cross-examination, the trial court asked the jurors for written questions. 2. The jury and witness left the courtroom while the admissibility of the question was determined. 3. The trial court read the question to both lawyers and they were given the opportunity to object to the questions. 4. The jury and witness were brought back into the courtroom and the admissible questions were read to the witness verbatim. 5. After the witness answered, both lawyers were allowed to ask follow-up questions limited to the subject matter of the juror’s question.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fazzino v. Guido

3. ““This is a case of first impression in Texas. See Buchanan v. State, 807 S.W.2d 644 (Tex.App.—Houston-[14th] 1991) (same issue). Although there is no case law in Texas which directly supports or condemns the practice of jurors asking questions to witnesses, foreign authorities which have addressed this issue are virtually unanimous in permitting it.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Morrison v. State