Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 853 S.W.2d 558 - Munoz v. State

Munoz v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

67 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably McDuff v. State (1997), Dowthitt v. State (1996)

67 state decisions

320199320002010decided

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 Burks v. United States · Greene v. Massey · Carrillo v. State · Gardner v. State · Edwards 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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the offense committed; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Corroborative evidence need not establish appellant’s guilt of the charged offense nor directly link appellant to the offense, but is sufficient if it “tends to connect” appellant to the offense. Each case must be considered on its own facts and circumstances— on its own merit. Apparently insignificant incriminating circumstances may sometimes afford satisfactory evidence of corroboration.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “In a genuinely bifurcated trial before a jury on a plea of not guilty, evidence that is introduced at the punishment stage of the trial can have little, if any, effect on the force of the evidence on the issue of guilt. In such a case, therefore, `our consideration of the evidence is necessarily limited to that evidence before the jury at the time it rendered its verdict of guilt.'”
    2 later decisions 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.