State v. Terrazas’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2018
15 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Weeks v. United States · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Greer v. Miller · United States v. Morrison
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Frye we observed that the United States Supreme Court has held that when a Sixth Amendment violation has occurred, the trial court must “identify and then neutralize the taint by tailoring relief appropriate in the circumstances to assure the defendant effective assistance of counsel and a fair trial.” Frye, 897 S.W.2d at 330 , citing United States v. Morrison, 449 U.S. 361, 365 , 101 S.Ct. 665, 668 , 66 L.Ed.2d 564, 568 (1981). A dismissal may be proper when “a defendant suffers demonstrable prejudice, or a substantial threat thereof, and where the trial court is unable to identify and neutralize the taint by other means.” Id. In addition to the situations referenced in Johnson and Frye , there can be other constitutional grounds for dismissing a charging instrument. See Cook, 940 S.W.2d at 625-27.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[wjhile a trial court may dismiss a charging instrument to remedy a constitutional violation, the dismissal of an indictment is “a drastic measure only to be used in the most extraordinary circumstances.” Therefore, where there is no constitutional violation, or where the [defendant’s] rights were violated but dismissal of the indictment was not necessary to neutralize the taint of the unconstitutional action, the trial court abuses its discretion in dismissing the charging instrument without the consent of the State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The situations discussed in Johnson were exemplary, not exhaustive. We explained in Frye that even though a particular constitutional violation was not among those set out as an authorized basis for a trial court’s dismissal of a charging instrument in Johnson , or in any other opinion from a Texas court, that did not preclude a trial court from having the authority to dismiss on that ground.”
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.