Bush v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
April 1997
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 92 Okla. Crim. 70 - Williams v. State · 83 Okla. Crim. 392 - Smith v. State · 86 Okla. Crim. 297 - Coe 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.
“This Court has been liberal in interpreting the sufficiency of a verdict so as to prevent technicalities from thwarting justice, but to approve the type of verdict we find here, where the jufy recites that it finds the defendant guilty of this, or of that, or of the other, would be to throw judicial reasoning to the winds and deprive defendants of the right to be clearly and concisely advised of the exact crime of which they are found guilty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Crow v. State“Jury verdict which found defendant-guilty of “assault or battery or assault and battery with a dangerous weapon with intent to do bodily harm” was so indefinite as to require reversal of judgment of conviction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Crow 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.