Douglas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably Alvie James Hale v. Gary Gibson (2000), Moore v. Reynolds (1998)
6 federal appellate · 37 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 Strickland v. Washington · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt · Beck v. Alabama · Enmund v. Florida
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Oklahoma has long held that a defendant's attempt to influence witnesses not to testify or to testify falsely is relevant and may be admitted as an admission by conduct and considered on the issue of guilt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The only issues that can be raised in post-conviction are those which were not or could not have been raised in a direct appeal and support a conclusion either that the outcome of the trial would have been different but for the errors or that the defendant is factually innocent. On review, this Court must determine whether controverted, previously unresolved factual issues material to the legality of the applicant's confinement exist, whether the applicant's grounds were or could have been previously raised, and whether relief may be granted.... This Court will not consider an issue which was raised on direct appeal and is therefore barred by res judicata, nor will we consider an issue which has been waived because it could have been raised on direct appeal but was not.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Douglas v. State
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.