2009 OK CR 4 - Hampton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Accordingly, a probationer's right of confrontation is subject to relaxed due process standards that may permit introduction of evidence such as letters, affidavits, and other material that would not be admissible in an adversary criminal trial, and do not prohibit use where appropriate of the conventional substitutes for live testimony, including affidavits, depositions, and documentary evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. CASH v. STATE

2. “[a]lthough concluding that in revocation proceedings, a trial court may rely upon an out-of-court statement that bears substantial guarantees of trustworthiness without violating a defendant's right of confrontation, we continue to hold to that authority indicating revocation cannot be based entirely upon hearsay evidence .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. CASH v. STATE

3. “the substantial trustworthiness test is a procedure upon which Oklahoma trial judges may rely in deciding when hearsay evidence can be considered over an objection to a probationer's right of confrontation [in a revocation proceeding].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. STATE v. AGUILAR