Small v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A]rt. 42.12, § 5(b) ... is not intended to preclude challenges to all of the rulings a trial court may potentially make in the course of a deferred adjudication proceeding.... The adjudication hearing must provide a defendant with minimum substantive and procedural due process protection.”); Goins v. State, 826 S.W.2d 733, 735 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, no pet.); see also Homan v. Hughes, 708 S.W.2d 449, 452 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Trevino v. State

2. “does not deprive this Court of jurisdiction to determine if a `hearing' was held that satisfied the requirements of substantive and procedural due process.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Whitney v. State

3. “no appeal challenging the constitutionality of this statute.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Whitney v. State