35 Okla. Crim. 103 - Stuart v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 1997
12 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 Board of Comm'rs Kingfisher v. Guarantee State Bank · Cecil v. Territory of Oklahoma · 5 Okla. Crim. 347 - Adams v. State · Watson v. State · Heidelbaugh 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The following persons shall be incompetent to testify: ****** “Children under ten (10) years of age who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Johnson v. State““Passing for further consideration the competency and materiality of the evidence, we believe that the evidence introduced was sufficient on the facts to carry the case to the jury and to sustain the verdict.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Defendant’s counsel, if they saw fit upon cross-examination, might have fully tested the knowledge of the witnesses.””
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.