Chavez v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Johnsonand Daugherty decided Article 38.23(a) should be construed according to its “plain” language with Article 38.23(a)’s “obtained” given its “ordinary meaning” unless this would lead to “absurd results.” [Johnson v. State, 871 S.W.2d 744, 749-51 (Tex.Cr.App.1994); State v. Daugherty, 931 S.W.2d 268, 270 (Tex.Cr.App.1996) ] [[Image here]] In addition, under both Johnson&and Daugherty, the “plain” language of Article 38.23(a) does not require exclusion of the [evidence]. No “ordinary person” would consider the [evidence] to have been “obtained” in violation of the law. See Daugherty, 931 S.W.2d at 270 (Article 38.23(a) rejects a strict “but/for” test of causation between the illegality and seizure of the evidence). Any causal relationship ... is too remote for Article 38.23(a) to consider the [evidence] to have been “obtained” by the “illegali-ty_” See Daugherty, 931 S.W.2d at 270 (ordinary meaning of “obtained” does not extend to remote causal relationships).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Trujillo v. State

2. “And, even if someone like appellant had standing to complain about a breach of the Agreement by one of its parties, the contractual remedy would be specific performance of the Agreement and not exclusion of evidence obtained by police officers acting outside the geographical boundaries set out in the Agreement.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Wilson v. State

3. “No evidence obtained by an officer or other person in violation of any provisions of the Constitution or laws of the State of Texas, or of the Constitution or laws of the United States of America, shall be admitted in evidence against the accused on the trial of any criminal case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Miles v. State