Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Mathews v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 11 | 11 |
Dunn v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 11 | 11 |
Puga v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 11 | 11 |
Lackey v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 10 | 11 |
Hicks v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 10 | 10 |
Bradfield v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.–Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.–Eastland 2001, pet. ref’d); Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.–Waco 1999, pet ref’d); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.–Beaumont 1996, pet. ref’d); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.–San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418 , 420-21 7 (Tex.App.–Dallas 1994, pet. ref’d). 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 9 | 9 |
Alberto v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.–Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.–Eastland 2001, pet. ref’d); Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.–Waco 1999, pet ref’d); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.–Beaumont 1996, pet. ref’d); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.–San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418 , 420-21 7 (Tex.App.–Dallas 1994, pet. ref’d). 2008Alberto v. State, 100 S.W.3d 528, 530 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003, no pet.); Bradfield v. State, 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2001, pet. refd); *390 Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, pet ref'd); Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex.App.Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 420-21 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994, pet. refd). | 6 | 6 |
Jackson v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Hicks v. State, 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State, 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999) pet. ref'd; Jackson v. State, 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1999) no pet.; Mathews v. State, 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1996) pet. ref'd; Puga v. State, 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996) no pet.; Lackey v. State, 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd.) Thus, the first step is to make a threshold comparison of the gravity of the offense against the severity of the sentence. 2003Bradfield v. State , 42 S.W.3d 350, 353 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2001, pet. ref'd); Hicks v. State , 15 S.W.3d 626, 632 (Tex. App.—Houston [14 th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd); Dunn v. State , 997 S.W.2d 885, 891-92 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, pet. ref'd); Jackson v. State , 989 S.W.2d 842, 845 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1999, no pet.); Mathews v. State , 918 S.W.2d 666, 669 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 1996, pet. ref'd); Puga v. State , 916 S.W.2d 547, 549-50 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.); Lackey v. State , 881 S.W.2d 418, 421 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd). | 4 | 4 |
Sullivan v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See, e.g., Sullivan v. State, 975 S.W.2d 755, 757 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1998, no pet.). 2005See, e.g., Sullivan v. State, 975 S.W.2d 755, 757 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1998, no pet.). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Dixongreen1 sentence2020See Story, 445 S.W.3d at 732 ; see also Dixon, 206 S.W.3d at 590 . | 1 | 1 |
State of Texas v. Story, Kimberly Crystalgreen1 sentence2020See Story, 445 S.W.3d at 732 ; see also Dixon, 206 S.W.3d at 590 . | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Stategreen2 sentences2014VIII; Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 284 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3006 (1983); McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315–17 (setting forth the analysis for proportionality of punishment); Moore v. State, 54 S.W.3d 529, 542 (Tex. App.— Fort Worth 2001, pet. ref’d) (adopting the McGruder analysis for claims of violations of the Eighth Amendment). 2014VIII; Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 284 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3006 (1983); McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315–17 (setting forth the analysis for proportionality of punishment); Moore v. State, 54 S.W.3d 529, 542 (Tex. App.— Fort Worth 2001, pet. ref’d) (adopting the McGruder analysis for claims of violations of the Eighth Amendment). | 1 | 1 |
Solem v. Helmred2 sentences2014VIII; Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 284 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3006 (1983); McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315–17 (setting forth the analysis for proportionality of punishment); Moore v. State, 54 S.W.3d 529, 542 (Tex. App.— Fort Worth 2001, pet. ref’d) (adopting the McGruder analysis for claims of violations of the Eighth Amendment). 2014VIII; Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 284 , 103 S. Ct. 3001, 3006 (1983); McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315–17 (setting forth the analysis for proportionality of punishment); Moore v. State, 54 S.W.3d 529, 542 (Tex. App.— Fort Worth 2001, pet. ref’d) (adopting the McGruder analysis for claims of violations of the Eighth Amendment). | 1 | 1 |
Trevino v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Trevino , 174 S.W.3d at 928-29 ("This Court has been cautious about applying the McGruder analysis"); see also Salinas v . 2007See Trevino , 174 S.W.3d at 928-29 ("This Court has been cautious about applying the McGruder analysis"); see also Salinas v . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Robert McGruder v. Steven W. Puckett
green
2 sentences2009Under the McGruder test "[o]nly if we infer that the sentence is grossly disproportionate to the offense will we then consider the remaining factors of the Solem test and compare the sentence received to (1) sentences for similar crimes in the same jurisdiction and (2) sentences for the same crime in other jurisdictions." McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315-16 . 2009Under the McGruder test "[o]nly if we infer that the sentence is grossly disproportionate to the offense will we then consider the remaining factors of the Solem test and compare the sentence received to (1) sentences for similar crimes in the same jurisdiction and (2) sentences for the same crime in other jurisdictions." McGruder, 954 F.2d at 315-16 . | 4 | 2009–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.