Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 351 P2D 756 - In Re Cannon

In Re Cannon’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2006
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 2006

4 state decisions

2019601970198019902000decided

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 70 Okla. Crim. 304 - Ex Parte Meadows · 72 Okla. Crim. 107 - Ex Parte Bradley · 81 Okla. Crim. 65 - In Re Stevens · 72 Okla. Crim. 292 - Ex Parte Ora Wooldridge · Jackson 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.

  1. ““In every criminal case, whether misdemeanor or felony, the accused is entitled to the assistance of counsel in his defense, and where the accused desires the assistance of counsel, and is unable to employ counsel, it is the duty of the court to assign counsel to represent him even though the charge filed against the accused is only a misdemeanor. ****** It is the solemn duty of the judge before whom a defendant appears without counsel to make a thorough inquiry and to take all steps necessary to insure the fullest protection of the defendant’s constitutional rights at every stage of the proceedings, and this duty cannot be discharged as though it were a mere procedural formality. A Judge can make certain that an accused’s professed waiver of counsel, is understandingly and wisely made only from a penetrating and comprehensive examination of all the circumstances under which such waiver is made. The Court of Criminal Appeals indulges every presumption against waiver of fundamental rights, and does not presume acquiescence in their loss. The minutes of the Trial Court constitute the best evidence of what took place at the arraignment, and when in doubt as to what occurred, great weight will be given to the recitals entered in the minutes of the proceedings, but where the minutes are silent, or leave the issue in doubt, the Court of Criminal Appeals will not indulge in presumptions, or speculation to sustain the proceedings, and will grant the writ of habeas corpus.””
    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.