Gresham v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1992
7 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 90 Okla. Crim. 415 - Moore v. State · Hunter v. State · 30 Okla. Crim. 24 - Hau 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are of the opinion and accordingly hold that it is error for the County Attorney to define or attempt to define ‘reasonable doubt’ when the Court has failed to define the same in its instructions; it is prejudicial error for the County Attorney to mis-state the definition of ‘reasonable doubt’ in his argument to the jury and when, as in the instant case, there are other improper remarks made during the closing argument, prejudicial to the accused, this Court will reverse and remand the cause for a new trial.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blades 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.