Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 Okla. Crim. 21 - McGarrah v. State

10 Okla. Crim. 21 - McGarrah v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1913

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
June 1959
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 1959

12 state decisions

5019131920193019401950decided

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.

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

  1. ““An unqualified reading of the words of the statute would make it necessary for the county attorney himself to subscribe his own name to all informations; but it has been held that the county attorney need not himself subscribe his name to an information, as it is sufficient if it be done by his legally appointed assistant.” McGarrah v. State, 10 Okla. Cr. 21 , 133 P. 260 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.