Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 11 Okla. Crim. 404 - Helm v. State

11 Okla. Crim. 404 - Helm v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 1964
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 1964

4 state decisions

20191519201930194019501960decided

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

  1. ““Both the statutes and the holdings of this court are clear, and the rights of the plaintiff in error well defined. The trial courts should exercise sufficient diligence to follow the plain letter of the statute, especially when such statute has been construed and uniformly upheld by the appellate court.””
    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.