State v. Omo’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably State v. Gunby (2006), State v. McCullough (2012)
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Rabinowitz · Preston v. United States · Cooper v. State of California · 66 Cal. 2d 107 - People v. Webb · Temple v. United States
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Based upon the testimony of Tony Pinzino offered by defendant and already stated, defendant requested the trial court to submit an instruction to the jury that he might be found guilty of the offense of receiving stolen property. This request was refused. Defendant asserts the refusal as error, in effect arguing the offense of receiving stolen property is a lesser degree of the crime of larceny which was charged. Not so. The offenses of larceny of property and receiving stolen property are separate and distinct crimes (State v. Fields, 70 Kan. 391 , 78 Pac. 833 ; State v. Wasinger, 133 Kan. 154 , 298 Pac. 763 ). The trial court properly refused the request.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Morris“"It is always desirable that there should be an orderly presentation of proof. Rules pertaining thereto, however, are directory and not mandatory. An alteration in the prescribed customary order of proof rests in the sound judicial discretion of the trial court and the court's ruling will not be disturbed on appeal unless its exercise of discretion is abused." (Syl. ¶ 8.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. McCorvey“"... We have always rejected, as prejudicial, evidence of another crime as proof that a person committed a crime upon specified occasion. But we have always admitted such evidence of prior commission of crime under proper limiting instructions when relevant to prove some other material fact including intent, plan, knowledge or identity ..." (l.c. 173.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. McCorvey
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.