Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 871 SW2D 183 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

132
cited by 132 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

132 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Hooper v. State (2007), Hartsfield v. State (2010)

132 state decisions

740199320002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · David W. McKay v. Texas · Geesa v. State · Butler v. State · Carlsen 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 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “• Dr. Boulet, Dr. Oehring, Dr. Peacock, and Dr. Alexander each testified that it was not possible for a 21-month-old child to accidentally swallow a wad of five paper towels. According to their testimony, the object was too large and would not be able to bypass the child’s gag reflex. They also testified that a 21-month-old child did not have the strength or the dexterity to pack the paper towels together into a mass sufficiently tight and small to go down his own throat. However, they opined that an adult could possibly “wad” the towels together and force them down the child’s throat. It is undisputed that Jimenez was the only adult in the apartment when B.G. began choking. • The wad of paper towels had blood on it. The State’s medical experts testified that the presence of blood on the paper towels — whether “soaked” with blood or merely “spotted” with blood — was consistent with the State’s theory that the wad was forced down B.G.’s throat. • Jimenez made statements to Detective De Los Santos that when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, could reasonably have implied guilt. Jimenez stated repeatedly that she could not remember what happened and whether she put the paper towels in B.G.’s mouth. Jimenez also asked De Los Santos, “If I were to tell you that I did it, what would happen?” • Dr. Peacock testified that she would expect a child to bite a person’s fingers if that person was forcing paper towels down the child’s throat. Jimenez admitted that B.G. bit ”
    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.