Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 834 SW2D 566 - Tate v. State

Tate v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
April 2015
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently April 2015

18 state decisions

170199220002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 180th Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Santobello v. New York · United States v. Morgan · South Terminal Corp. v. Environmental Protection Agency · Montrose Chemical Corporation of California v. Russell E. Train, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Montrose Chemical Corporation of California v. Russell E. Train, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency

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

  1. “(1) the newly discovered evidence was unknown to the movant at the time of the trial; (2) the failure to discover the evidence was not due to want of diligence; (3) the evidence was sufficiently material to bring about a different result in another trial; and (4) the evidence is admissible and is not merely cumulative, corroborative, collateral, or impeaching.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Texas law has not established circumstances or conditions under which a judicial official might properly be compelled to articulate his reasons for a decision in a particular case, and we do not propose to state such a rule here. However, we conclude that if such a rule were to be established, the better rule would require, at the very least, a threshold showing of improper conduct on the part of the judge that would justify compelling him to testify.”
    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.