Dugan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 1992
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 64 Cal. App. 474 - Grillich v. Weinshenk · 50 Okla. Crim. 354 - McManus v. State · 31 Okla. Crim. 217 - Cooper v. State · 20 Okla. Crim. 124 - Smith v. State · 38 Okla. Crim. 328 - Moorehead 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.
“"An additional reversible error in the instructions was in the failure of the court to require the State to elect as to which of two alleged offenses of rape the Defendant was being tried on, or, in the alternative, the court erred in not instructing the jury that it should treat the first offense on which proof was presented as the offense upon which a conviction was sought. * * * * * * Clearly the testimony in this case indicated that there were two alleged acts of sexual intercourse. The court failed in its instructions to tell the jury which one of the two alleged offenses was the offense upon which the Defendant was to be tried. This error occurred in spite of the fact that in the State's Requested Instruction No. 3 the State specifically asked the court to instruct the jury as follows (C-M., Vol. V, page 1105): `* * * and in that connection you are instructed that the evidence offered which tends to prove the first acts of sexual intercourse by the Defendant, John William Shapard, with the prosecutrix, Sherri Noble, is the evidence upon which the charge of rape in the second degree is founded in this case.' The court refused to give that instruction and instead gave the following instruction (C-M., Vol. V, page 1099): `Other evidence, if any, which tends to prove the commission of more than one rape, if any, of a prosecutrix and of more than one crime, if any, by a defendant is admissible and proper for consideration by the Jury to show (1) motive of the defendant, (2) ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shapard v. State“plead in bar as to any subsequent prosecution for the offense on which he was actually convicted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Drake 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.