Bigby v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 113 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 119 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Clewis v. State (1996), Brooks v. State (2010)
4 federal appellate · 113 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 In Re King's Estate · Penry v. Lynaugh · National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Yagow v. United States · Montgomery 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 119 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) 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. (b) The term "mental disease or defect" does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he decision of [Texas courts of appeals] shall be conclusive on all questions of fact brought before them on appeal or error.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Goodman v. State · Clewis v. State“Several expert witnesses testified appellant knew his conduct was illegal, however, these experts contended that appellant did not know the act was “morally” wrong. In other words, appellant believed that regardless of society’s views about this illegal act and his understanding it was illegal, under his “moral” code it was permissible. This focus upon appellant’s morality is misplaced. The question of insanity should focus on whether a defendant understood the nature and quality of his action and whether it was an act he ought to do. By accepting and acknowledging his action was "illegal” by societal standards, he understood that others believed his conduct was "wrong.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Rubio v. State · 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.