Raybourn v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently June 1982
9 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 Winslow v. State · 23 Okla. Crim. 198 - White v. State · 71 Okla. Crim. 75 - Robinson v. State · 1 Okla. Crim. 307 - George v. United States · 97 Okla. Crim. 217 - Vandiver 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An information may be amended in matter of substance or form at any time before the defendant pleads, without leave, and may be amended after plea on order of the court where the same can be done without material prejudice to the right of the defendant; no amendment shall cause any delay of the trial, unless for good cause shown by affidavit.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ivy v. State · Cody v. State““ ‘Corroboration of a' confession . . . need not, independent of the confession, establish the corpus delicti beyond a reasonable doubt, if evidence and confession together are convincing beyond a reasonable doubt of the commission of the crime and defendant’s connection therewith.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. State · Smith v. State““1. An information may be amended in matters of either form or substance when it can be done without , prejudice-to the substantial rights of the accused. "2. Where an information charging a felony is amended, and the charge in the amended information is substantially the same as the charge in the preliminary complaint before the committing magistrate, the contention that accused should have a right to preliminary hearing on the amended information is untenable.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cody 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.