Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 891 SW2D 267 - Marin v. State

Marin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably Amos v. Scott (1995), Posey v. State (1998)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

180199420002010decided

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 Boykin v. State · Marin v. State · Grunsfeld v. State · Webb v. State · Johnson 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a]n appointed counsel is entitled to 10 days to prepare for a proceeding but may waive the preparation time with the consent of the defendant in writing or on the record in open court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “when examining amendments to existing legislation to determine legislative intent, it is presumed that the legislature was aware of case law affecting or relating to the statute.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “The purpose of Article 26.04(b) V.A.C.C.P. [now art. 1.051(e) ] is clearly to guarantee to an indigent accused that he and his court appointed attorney will have a reasonable time in which they can prepare a defense. In the present ease, it is clear from the record that appellant’s counsel had three months in which to prepare for trial. Appointment of counsel here was to allow payment to the lawyer for his services, and no error is presented by the action of the trial judge.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.