Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 88 Okla. Crim. 299 - Doser v. State · 88 Okla. Crim. 422 - Marvin Harris v. State · 96 Okla. Crim. 209 - Crossett v. State · 85 Okla. Crim. 14 - Bunn v. State · 60 Okla. Crim. 99 - Neely v. State
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.
““The general rule is that evidence, which in any manner shows or tends to show that the accused has committed an offense other than that for which he is on trial and wholly independent thereof, even though an offense of the same sort, is inadmissible, since accused must be convicted, if at all, by evidence which shows him to he guilty of the offense charged.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Love v. State““The repeated asking of incompetent questions, which clearly have for their purpose the intimation of something to the jury that is either not true or not capable of being proven if true, is wrong, and such conduct of counsel is not cured because the court sustains the objection to the question.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Love v. State
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.