Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 SW3D 843 - Thompson v. State

Thompson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

15 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 208th Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Relies on Darden v. Wainwright · Mosley v. State · Long v. State · Bauder v. State · Martinez 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “designed to arouse the passion and prejudices of the jury and as such are highly inappropriate.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “by urging the jury to consider matters not before them, and while effectively acknowledging that to do so was a violation of their solemn oath as jurors ... violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and implicated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “En Banc Consideration Disfavored. En banc consideration of a case is not favored and should not be ordered unless necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of a court's decisions or unless extraordinary circumstances require en banc consideration.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. In Re VV

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.