Focusing on process over result in error analysis
Also stated as: Procedural Error Analysis and Harmless Error
99 Texas opinions cite these pages1991–20266 pages cited by Texas courts
The pages courts cite for it
- Cited for: Focusing on process over result in error analysis
- Cited for: Analyzing when procedural errors are not subject to harm analysis
- Cited for: Validating answers despite procedural defects
- Cited for: Determining harmless error for procedural deadline failures
- Cited for: Service of process timing and procedural defects
- Cited for: Procedural error analysis and unquantifiable harm
Ranked by how often Texas courts cite each page. The bar is how citing opinions treated that page (green followed, yellow questioned or limited, red negative); a red or yellow chip is the case’s own overall treatment.
Texas opinions citing these pages
- Vernon King Dixon v. State of Texas, No. 13-23-00558-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg June 18, 2025)
- Paul James Donaldson v. State of Texas, No. 13-23-00557-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Mar. 13, 2025)
- Indira Rodriguez Gonzalez v. State of Texas, No. 13-22-00382-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Dec. 14, 2023)
- Larry Coleman Hicks v. State, No. 12-19-00258-CR (Tex. App.—Tyler Sept. 9, 2020)
- Harley William Fike v. State, No. 03-09-00123-CR (Tex. App.—Austin Sept. 22, 2010)
- Powell v. State, 304 S.W.3d 630 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2010)
- Lorenzo Powell v. State, No. 09-08-00243-CR (Tex. App.—Beaumont Jan. 20, 2010)
- Heidelberg v. State, 112 S.W.3d 658 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003)
- Heidelberg, Donald C. v. State, No. 01-00-00133-CR (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 8, 2003)
- Wanda Bernard v. State of Texas, No. 12-01-00002-CR (Tex. App.—Tyler Feb. 20, 2002)
- Richard Ruiz v. State, No. 04-98-01082-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio Apr. 4, 2001)
- O'NEAL v. State, 999 S.W.2d 826 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1999)
- Reeves v. State, 969 S.W.2d 471 (Tex. App.—Waco 1998)
- Umoja v. State, 965 S.W.2d 3 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1998)
From the opinions citing the top pages above (up to 400 per page are read), most pages cited first, then newest.
Nearest issues
- 10 opinions
- 88 opinions
- 18 opinions
- 60 opinions
- 10 opinions
- 8 opinions
Filed under: Appellate Review of Sentencing Decisions
Where else it is alive
Federal 394OK 26NY 23VA 21MS 14MD 13RI 12PA 11IL 10CA 9WV 9AL 8NC 5NH 4FL 3GA 3SC 3DC 2PR 2AK 1IA 1MA 1NJ 1NM 1SD 1TN 1WA 1
Opinions per jurisdiction citing these pages. A span that stops early can mean the doctrine was dropped there.
How this is built: each issue is a set of opinion pages that later courts cite for the same proposition, grouped from what the citing courts wrote. Names are machine-written from those citations; read the cases before relying on them. Search case law