Martinez v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably King v. State (1997), Wood v. State (2000)
2 federal appellate · 51 state decisions
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 Barefoot v. Estelle · Estelle v. Smith · Livingston v. Texas · United States v. John E. Test, Francis R. Salazar v. United States of America, United States of America v. Enrique Sandoval Chavez, United States of America v. Cameron David Bishop · Turner 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The word "deliberately" has a meaning different and distinct from the word "intentionally" as that word was previously defined in the charge on guilt and the word "deliberately" as used in the first special issue means a manner of doing an act characterized by or resulting from careful consideration: a conscious decision involving a thought process which embraces more than mere will to engage in the conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rodriguez v. State“A continuance or postponement may be granted on the motion of the State or defendant after the trial has begun, when it is made to appear to the satisfaction of the court that by some unexpected occurrence since the trial began, which no reasonable diligence could have anticipated, the applicant is so taken by surprise that a fair trial cannot be had.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Deaton v. State“It is an affirmative defense to prosecution that, at the time of the conduct charged, the actor, as a result of severe mental disease or defect, did not know that his conduct was wrong.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ruffin v. State
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.