Tice v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 11 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It has been held in this jurisdiction that the best method of proving a prior conviction is made, first by offering in evidence the indictment, or information, judgment, sentence, and commitment. Proof of the fact should then be made that the defendant, in the case on trial, is one and the same person as the defendant in the prior con viction relied upon to establish the offense of a second or subsequent conviction. Further proof should be made that the judgment and conviction is final, and not appealed from, or if appealed from, that final disposition has been made of the same, adverse to the defendant. If the defendant’s judgment and sentence has been suspended, that fact should be shown. Morse v. State, 63 Okl.Cr. 445 , 77 P.2d 757 ; Spann v. State, 69 Okl.Cr. 369 , 103 P.2d 389 ; Bird v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 313 , 188 P.2d 242 .””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hill v. State · Honeycutt v. State

2. “Every person who has been convicted in any other state, government or country of an offense which, if committed within this state, would be punishable by the laws of this state by imprisonment in the penitentiary, is punishable for any subsequent crime committed within this state ... to the same extent as if such first conviction had taken place in a court of this state.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 101 F. App'x 274 - Ives v. Boone