Barber v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““All instructions given by the trial court should be considered, and where they fairly and fully present the issues involved, and no fundamental error occurs whereby the defendant has been prejudiced or deprived of a substantial right, the case will not be reversed on appeal. “It is not error for trial court in criminal prosecution to refuse defendant’s requested instructions where substance of requested instructions is covered by given instructions.””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sharp v. State · Harwood v. State

2. ““In the instant ease there is no question as to the whereabouts of Charles Henry Woods. He had been in the custody of the Federal Government for some time, and was confined in the Federal prison in Texarkana, Texas, at the time of the present trial. This Court has been very explicit in this and as so ably pointed out in the State’s brief, ‘There can be no question under the circumstances of this ease.’ “Where the testimony of the witness was given at a preliminary examination, and taken down by the reporter in the presence of the defendant and his counsel who cross-examined him, and such testimony was filed with the clerk, the transcript is admissible where the witness is not present and cannot be found in the jurisdiction. Fitzsimmons v. State, 14 Okl.Cr. 80 , 166 P. 453 ; Jeffries v. State, 13 Okl. Cr. 146, 162 P. 1137 ; Henry v. State, 10 Okl.Cr. 369 , 136 P. 982 , 52 L.R.A., N.S., 113; Edwards v. State, 9 Okl. Cr. 306, 131 P. 956 , 44 L.R.A.,N.S., 701; Valentine v. State, 16 Okl.Cr. 76 , 194 P. 254 ; Clark v. State, 28 Okl.Cr. 31 , 228 P. 791 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 239 F. Supp. 265 - Barber v. Page

3. ““Counsel for the defendant states that the State made no effort to return Woods for the trial. Under the above rulings, it was not necessary. The witness was certainly out of the State and out of the jurisdiction of the court, as counsel for the defendant himself admitted when he said the witness was serving two rather extended terms in the Federal Penitentiary. Therefore, you could say that there definitely was a permanency to his absence.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 239 F. Supp. 265 - Barber v. Page