2 Okla. Crim. 519 - De Graff v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably Lewis v. Tripp (2010), Gomez v. State (2007)
2 federal appellate · 42 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 Ex parte Burford · Evans v. Willis, County Judge · Intoxicating-Liquor Cases · State v. Lee · Saunders v. People
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This provision of our Constitution [Article II Section 80] is almost an exact copy of 'the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which is as follows: "Article IV(80). The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized." -It is true that the language is not in all respects the same in the two provisions; but the substance is identical. For a proper understanding of the question before us, it is important to find out what construction the United States courts have placed upon this provision.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Long v. State · Gomez v. State““An indictment or information must charge but one offense; but when the same acts may constitute different offenses, or the proof may be uncertain as to which of two or more offenses the accused may be guilty, the different offenses may be set forth in separate counts in the same indictment or information; but in such cases the information or indictment must show upon its face that the separate counts all refer to one and the same transaction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches or seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, describing as particularly as may be the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sloan v. Sprouse
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.