2000 OK CR 5 - Powell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Alvie James Hale v. Gary Gibson (2000), Douglas v. Workman (2009)
2 federal appellate · 27 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 · Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, though not present, are principals and are equally culpable with other principles. Rounds v. State, 679 P.2d 283, 286-87 (OKkl.Cr.1984); 21 ©.98.1991, § 172. Mere presence or acquiescence, without participation, does not constitute a crime. However, only slight participation is needed to change a person's status from a mere spectator into an alder and abettor. Hackney v. State, 874 P.2d 810, 814 (OkL.Cr.1994); McBrain v. State, 763 P.2d 121, 124-125 (Okl.Cr.1988). "Aiding and abetting in a crime requires the State to show the accused procured it to be done, or aids, assists, abets, advises or encourages the commission of the crime." Hindman v. State, 647 P.2d 456, 458 (Okl.Or.1982).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Counsel pointed to no questions by the State which would create an inference of purposeful discrimination. There is no clear "pattern" of racially-tied strikes. Appellant's own brief essentially admits five of the seven African Americans excused from the jury were removed on proper grounds. The sixth was related to a defense witness. We do not even know how many African Americans were seated among the twelve jurors.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mitchell v. State“Considering the second stage instructions as a whole, we do not find the admission of the victim impact evidence altered or negated said instructions. Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the jury's sentencing discretion was not properly channeled by the instructions given to them or that the victim impact evidence influenced the jury to impose a sentence not supported by the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Grissom 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.