Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 819 SW2D 821 - Gibbs v. State

Gibbs v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably Williams v. State (1997), Fisher v. State (1993)

4 federal appellate · 62 state decisions

400199120002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Illinois v. Gates · Johnson v. Mississippi · Fort Wayne Books, Inc. v. Indiana · Harris 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a] statement of the declarant’s then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification, or terms of declar-ant’s will. (Emphasis added).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““When the record or any portion thereof is lost or destroyed it may be substituted in the trial court and when so substituted the record may be prepared and transmitted to the appellate court as in other cases. If the appellant has made a timely request for a statement of facts, but the court reporter’s notes and records have been lost or destroyed without appellant’s fault, the appellant is entitled to a new trial unless the parties agree on a statement of facts.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““As a matter of pleading and as a prerequisite to obtaining a hearing [on a motion for new trial], keeping in mind that the purpose of the affidavit requirement is to limit the parameters of the hearing that is sought, we hold that an affidavit is sufficient if it demonstrates that reasonable grounds exist for believing that jury misconduct occurred. ...”[ 8 ]”
    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.