Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 287 P2D 458 - Sanders v. State

Sanders v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
July 1982
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently July 1982

13 state decisions

801955196019701980decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Boyd v. United States · 24 Okla. Crim. 394 - Gore v. State · 59 Okla. Crim. 146 - Kennamer v. State · 8 Okla. Crim. 406 - State v. Frisbee · United States v. Butler

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

  1. ““It follows that the failure of the trial court to give defendant’s requested instruction No. 1, advising the jury to disregard any evidence obtained by means of the entry of defendant’s home, stated to be illegal, was not error. “If in the course of the trial, when it first became apparent to counsel that the officers invaded defendant’s home without authority of a warrant of arrest or a search warrant, he had objected to any testimony or evidence obtained by means of such entry, the trial court would probably have orally and instanter instructed the jury that all evidence bearing on the question of the intoxication of the defendant, or other evidence obtained by means of such entrance to her home, could not be considered, and thereafter if a demurrer had been interposed and by reason of the insufficiency of the evidence to make out a case, would have sustained the demurrer. Failing and with proper exceptions reserved, it would have been the duty of this court to have reversed and remanded the case. “If in this case there had been evidence of the intoxication of the defendant in addition to that obtained by the illegal entrance of the home, then even though the court had stricken from the consideration of the jury the evidence so illegally obtained, it would not have been out of line for the court as a further precaution to have given an instruction similar to defendant’s requested instruction No. 1, above mentioned. The wise thing to do in cases of this nature, however, ass”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““It has been held that to make such objection available, it must be interposed at the first opportunity presented. * * * It should have been made, either at the beginning of the trial, by a motion to suppress or reject such evidence, or in the course of the examination, so soon as it became apparent that the state would rely upon it. Otherwise defendant waives his right to be heard on this question.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““A subjection sufficient to excuse from punishment may be inferred in favor of a wife from the fact of cover-ture whenever she committed the act charged in the presence and with the assent of her husband, except where such act is a participation in: [here eighteen separate offenses are enumerated.]””
    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.