Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 P2D 182 - Pleasant v. State

Pleasant v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 1966
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 38 Okla. Crim. 269 - Brogdon v. State · Miller v. State · Petition for Writ of Mandamus by Enslinger · Simpson v. State · Stokes 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.

  1. ““Where petitioner for case made forma pauperis alleged that he had no funds for appeal, but did not categorically state that he had no relatives or friends from whom he could get money to pay for a record, and did not allege that his trial counsel could not state evidence from memory in narrative form; trial court did not, under the circumstances, abuse its discretion in refusing to order record for appeal at expense of county.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Under the circumstances of this cause, where no motion for new trial or notice of appeal is given within the statutory time, and where the application for forma pauperis case made contains no supporting proof of poverty, this Court will not set aside the rulings of the trial court and issue a Writ of Mandamus.””
    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.