Barry v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
October 1988
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 84 Okla. Crim. 97 - Sadler v. State · Cody v. State · 115 Cal. App. 2d 659 - People v. Spinosa · 79 Okla. Crim. 285 - Little v. State · Whisenhunt 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The trial court should have instructed the jury, however, that the testimony given by the witness at the preliminary and in his sworn statement could only be considered for the purpose of impeaching the credibility of the witness, and not as substantial testimony to prove the truth of the statement. In the absence of such a request by defendant, and upon his failure to raise the matter in motion for new trial, the alleged error cannot be raised herein.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wahlgreen 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.