Robison v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably State v. Anderson (2005), Lagrone v. State (1997)
4 federal appellate · 41 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 Jackson v. Denno · Teague v. Lane · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Lockett v. Ohio · Eddings v. Oklahoma
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here, there were three separate requests made by the jury in determining whether a dispute existed, each becoming increasingly narrow in scope. Additionally, the trial court clearly informed the jury that testimony would be read back only in the event of a dispute after each request, for information. By considering the last note requesting the testimony in conjunction with-prior notes from the jury and the corresponding instructions from the trial court, it was not unreasonable to infer a disagreement among the jury regarding Dr. Price’s testimony. The trial court was properly cautious in observing the competing concerns of article 36.28 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Randon v. State · DeGraff v. State“The court, the attorney for the state, or the attorney for the defendant may not inform a juror or a prospective juror of the consequences to the defendant if a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity is returned.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lockard v. State · Rudd v. State“Mitigating circumstances relevant to punishment within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment are those circumstances of “the defendant’s background and character [which will support a] belief, long held by this society, that defendants who commit criminal acts that are attributable to [such circumstances] may be less culpable than defendants who have no such excuse.” California v. Brown, 479 U.S. 538, 545 , 107 S.Ct. 837, 841 , 93 L.Ed.2d 934 (1987) (concurring opinion of O’Conner, J.).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Goff 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.