Rodriguez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. Trial counsel failed to properly investigate the factual and legal issues in the case, instead engaging in unquestioning acceptance of the State’s version of the facts, including a most critical issue — the cause of death — when at least two available experts could have testified that [Rodriguez's] baby likely did not die of starvation. 2. Trial counsel failed to controvert, in any meaningful way, the State's medical expert testimony. 3. Trial counsel failed to interview and subpoena neutral eyewitnesses, and other unbiased individuals, who observed [Rodriguez] while pregnant, after her child’s birth, and at the child’s death, and whose testimony would have exculpated her, thus disproving the State’s prosecution theory. 4. Trial counsel failed to take the State's expert witnesses on voir dire outside the jury's presence, despite the fact that they had an absolute right to this procedure under Texas Rule of Criminal Evidence 705(b). 5. Trial counsel elicited, opened the door to, and failed to properly object to numerous pieces of inadmissible evidence that were prejudicial to [Rodriguez] and misled the jury. 6. Trial counsel failed to prepare their witnesses — including [Rodriguez] herself— and failed to familiarize themselves with their testimony, leaving them surprised, damaged, and urging the jury to disregard their own witnesses’ testimony on closing argument. 7. Trial counsel failed to preserve any evi-dentiary error or procedural error in the case by failing to ensure”

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