Sanders v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 114th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Cronic · Doggett v. United States · Kachina Plywood, Inc. v. Hurt · Keene Corp. v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The attorney representing the State may examine the witnesses before the grand jury and shall advise as to the proper mode of interrogating them. No person other than the attorney representing the State or a grand juror may question a witness before the grand jury. No person may address the grand jury about a matter before the grand jury other than the attorney representing the State, a witness, or the accused or suspected person or the attorney representing the accused or suspected person if approved by the attorney representing the State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pettigrew v. State“may examine the witnesses” and did not contain that language of the current version (”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mason v. State
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.