Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 981 SW2D 189 - Tate v. State

Tate v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently January 2016

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

180199820002010decided

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 Bodine v. United States · 159 Tex. Crim. 602 - Dempsey v. State · United States v. Keiser · Purtell v. State · Adams v. Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

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

  1. “The Dempsey line of cases stands for the proposition that reputation or specific act evidence is admissible to show a victim's character and demonstrate that either the defendant had a reasonable fear of the victim, or the victim was, in fact, the aggressor. However, this common law rule, as it developed, cannot be reconciled with the specific language of the relevant rules of evidence. While Rule 404(a)(2) allows the admission of evidence concerning a victim’s character or pertinent character traits, Rule 405(a) limits the permissible method of proof to reputation or opinion testimony.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he evidence of this uncommunieated threat by Rackley, allegedly made only a month or two before Rackley’s death, had relevance beyond its tendency to demonstrate Rackley’s character. A reasonable jury could have believed this evidence shed light upon Rackley’s state of mind when he arrived at appellant’s house on the night in question_ In other words, the statement ... was probative of his state of mind and possibly indicated a motive or demonstration of intent behind the confrontation that evening. In sum, Glen’s testimony concerning Rackley’s threat was probative of whether he was, in fact, the aggressor and admissible for “other purposes” besides demonstrating character and actions in conformity therewith.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a) Character Evidence Generally. Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of his character is not admissible for the purpose of proving that he acted in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except: ****** (2) Character of victim. Subject to Rule 412, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of peaceable character of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor;”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.