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.
11 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 2011–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2016Ann. art. 46B.003(a); see Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695 , 104 S.Ct. at 2068 (“The governing legal standard plays a critical role in defining the question to be asked in assessing the prejudice from counsel’s errors.”). 2016Ann. art. 46B.003(a); see Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695 , 104 S.Ct. at 2068 (“The governing legal standard plays a critical role in defining the question to be asked in assessing the prejudice from counsel’s errors.”). | 4 | 4 |
All Saints Health System v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commissiongreen2 sentences2011See All Saints, 125 S.W.3d at 103 . 2011See All Saints, 125 S.W.3d at 103 . | 3 | 3 |
Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America v. Justissgreen2 sentences2022A property owner’s qualification to testify does not allow the property owner to substitute a “value to me” standard for the governing legal standard of “market value.” See id. 2022An owner’s qualification to testify does not allow the property owner to substitute a “value to me” standard for the governing legal standard of “market value.” See id. at 158, 161 . | 1 | 1 |
King v. Stategreen1 sentence2015See King v. State, 17 S.W.3d 7, 23 (Tex.App.-Houston[14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Montoya v. State
yellow
1 sentence2023To dispose of Appellant’s contention that the State commented on his failure to testify, we quote Appellant’s entire argument, in which he attempts to apply the relevant legal principles to the facts of this appeal: The governing legal standard in this appeal, under Montoya, is “if the prosecutor’s remark called to the jury’s attention the absence of evidence that could only be supplied by the testimony of the accused, the comment is improper and the conviction is subject to being reversed.” . . . 744 S.W.2d at 35 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Bell v. Cone
green
2 sentences2015See id., at 405, 413; Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 698 , 152 L. 2015See id., at 405, 413; Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 698 , 152 L. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.