Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2022 OKCR 16 - STATE v. WARD

STATE v. WARD’s Empirical Analysis

2022

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1152

Relies on McGirt v. Oklahoma · Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta

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

  1. “The Court reasoned that the reservations recognized as Indian Country in McGirt and our post- McGirt cases remain part of Oklahoma, rather than separate territories or federal enclaves; and that these federal statutes have not vested the United States with exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute non-Indians for crimes on the reservations.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “that States have jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed in Indian Country unless pre-empted by federal law; and that neither the General Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1152 , nor Public Law 280, 67 Stat. 588 , have pre-empted Oklahoma's concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute non-Indians for crimes against Indians in Indian Country.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.