Barrett v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2004
8 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 England v. State · 90 Okla. Crim. 283 - Taylor 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not essential that corroborating evidence shall cover every material point testified to by [an] accomplice or be sufficient alone to warrant a verdict of guilty. If the accomplice is corroborated as to one material fact or facts by independent evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime, the jury may from that infer that he speaks the truth as to all. Such corroborating evidence, however, must show more than the mere commission of the offense or circumstances thereof. “The weight and sufficiency of corroborating evidence is for the jury, and, where the jury has returned its verdict, this court will take the strongest view of the corroborating testimony that the evidence warrants.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘It is the law in this state that an accomplice’s testimony need not be corroborated as to every material point. If the accomplice is corroborated as to one material fact, or facts, by independent evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime, the jury may from that infer that he speaks the truth as to all.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roberts v. State““ ‘Where there is evidence in corroboration of an accomplice tending to connect a defendant with the commission of the crime charged, the sufficiency of such corroborating evidence is for the jury.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roberts 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.