Llamas v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is conceivable that appellant would not have been convicted for either offense had he been granted his request for separate trials. Clearly, evidence as to the cocaine 'charge was admitted in this trial that would otherwise not be relevant to the possession of altered identification numbers and vice versa. The record in this case shows that no less than five times during voir dire, venire persons commented in front of the entire jury panel that they were concerned that appellant had two charges against him. This is exactly the type of harm that section 3.04 allows a criminal defendant, in his sole and absolute discretion, to choose to avoid.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dominguez v. State · Llamas v. State

2. “Prosecutor: Do you think that might affect you to vote— cause you to vote guilty, even though you weren’t convinced beyond a reasonable doubt? Venireman: If I felt the drug charge was going to stick then yeah, I might think he knew what he was doing. [[Image here]] Venireman: I would be more likely— if the drug charge was proven and it was almost to the very top of saying— you know, you’ve just got a little bit— couldn’t prove he knew that the car was stolen, then I would be thinking, well,yeah, he did know it was stolen too.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Llamas v. State