Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 90 SW2D 942 - Powell v. Smith

Powell v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1936

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 2011
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 51 Tex. Crim. 488 - Ex Parte Pollard · 45 Tex. Crim. 180 - Medford v. State · Dawson v. State · 44 Tex. Crim. 575 - Ex Parte Elliott · 34 Tex. Crim. 103 - Aaron 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In all counties, justice’s precincts or incorporated towns or cities wherein the sale of intoxicating liquors had been prohibited by local option elections held under the laws of the State of Texas and in force at the time of the taking effect of Section 20, Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas, it shall continue to be unlawful to manufacture, sell, barter or exchange in any such county, justice’s precinct or incorporated town or city, any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors or medicated bitters capable of producing intoxication or any other intoxicants whatsoever, for beverage purposes, unless and until a majority of the qualified voters in such county or political subdivision thereof voting in an election held for such purpose shall determine such to be lawful . . [Emphasis added.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.