State v. Bezdicek’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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. “Any interpretation of Section 18 must begin with a reading of the provision as a whole, giving effect to each part through the natural significance of the words used and their grammatical arrangement.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hall · 2008 OK CR 16 - Maw v. State

2. “Shall a Constitutional Amendment amending Article II, Section 18, of the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma to provide for composition of grand juries; providing that grand juries be convened upon the filing of a petition signed by the qualified electors of a county; establishing numerical signature requirements for the sufficiency of such petitions; allowing the Attorney General to convene and conduct grand juries, upon the filing of a verified application, to investigate crimes alleged to have been committed in one county or involving multi-county criminal activities; granting such grand juries power to indict for all character and grades of crimes, be approved by the people?”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Movants to Quash Multicounty Grand Jury Subpoena v. Dixon

3. “When construing a constitutional provision, the intent of the provision's framers and the People who adopted it should, if at all possible, be determined by the plain language of the provision itself.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2008 OK CR 16 - Maw v. State