Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 Okla. Crim. 430 - Wright v. State

21 Okla. Crim. 430 - Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
September 1996
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 1996

9 state decisions

3019221930194019501960197019801990decided

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.

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

  1. ““This information was defective, in that it failed to charge, negatively, that the child attended no other school, and that no other means of education was provided, as incorporated in the statutory definition of the offense. These were not mere matters of defense; they constitute an essential element of the offense, as defined by statute. Where a negative averment is an essential and material part of the description of an offense, such negative averment must be made.””
    1 later decision 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.