Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 942 SW2D 602 - Lagrone v. State

Lagrone v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

147
cited by 147 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 142 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 147 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Wesbrook v. State (2000), Leday v. State (1998)

3 federal appellate · 142 state decisions

820199720002010decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Kyles v. Whitley · Estelle v. Smith · Jurek v. Texas · Wright v. Wright

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

  1. “A defendant must make a timely objection in order to preserve an error in the admission of evidence. An objection should be made as soon as the ground for objection becomes apparent. In general, this occurs when the evidence is admitted. Therefore, if a question clearly calls for an objectionable response, a defendant should make an objection before the witness responds. If he fails to object until after an objectionable question has been asked and answered, and he can show no legitimate reason to justify the delay, his objection is untimely arid error is waived.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[W]e find no violation of the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights. We also note that appellant has failed to provide us with any distinction or reason that the Texas Constitution provides greater protection than the Fifth Amendment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “to circumvent Criminal Rule 608(b)'s moratorium on the use of specific instances of conduct for impeachment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.