Fairris v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1991
5 state decisions
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 8 Okla. Crim. 406 - State v. Frisbee · 70 Okla. Crim. 443 - Sweet v. State · 63 Okla. Crim. 138 - Clark v. State · 58 Okla. Crim. 275 - Denton v. State · State v. Yee Guck
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The purpose in furnishing the defendant with the names and addresses of the witnesses to be used by the State is to apprise him whom the witnesses are and where they may be found. If the defendant had not been able to locate the witnesses because of the incorrect addresses, he should have made his troubles known to the court before anñouncing ready for trial.” at page 711.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blackwood 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.