Hawkins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently November 1980
10 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 Roulston v. State · 88 Okla. Crim. 299 - Doser v. State · 13 Okla. Crim. 176 - Miller v. State · 68 Okla. Crim. 220 - Boyer v. State · 85 Okla. Crim. 14 - Bunn 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... Such as where the crime is committed to prepare the way for another and the commission of the second crime is made to depend upon the perpetration of the first. In that event the second becomes connected and a related transaction and the proof of the commission of the first becomes relevant to show the motive for the perpetration of the second... ." (Citations omitted) 419 P.2d at 284 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Burks v. State · Woodruff v. State““Evidence of other crimes in order to be admissible must come within one of the well-recognized exceptions to the rule. That it tends to establish (1) Motive, (2) Intent, (3) The absence of mistake or accident, (4) A common scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other that proof of one tends to establish the other, and, (5) The identity of a person charged with the commission of the crime on trial.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Payne v. State““ . . that when a defendant is put upon trial for one offense, he is to be convicted, if at all, by evidence which shows he is guilty of that offense alone and the admission of evidence of other crimes, either prior or subsequent to the offense for which he is on trial is inadmissible.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doyle 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.