Broxton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 1999
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Halper · United States v. Felix · Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Sullivan v. Ashe · Phillips v. State · United States v. McCormick
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he crux of Broxton's complaint is that the State used the extraneous offenses as a basis for the death penalty. He received the death penalty. Therefore, double jeopardy bars a second punishment for those offenses in a subsequent trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Broxton“no person, for the same offense, shall be twice put in jeopardy of life or liberty, nor shall a person be again put upon trial for the same offense, after a verdict of not guilty in a court of competent jurisdiction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Broxton“This court and other Texas courts of appeals have determined that double jeopardy does not apply under these circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Broxton
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.