Handley v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 1975
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 80 Okla. Crim. 300 - Washington v. State · 3 Okla. Crim. 381 - Ex Parte Warford · Stroud 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.
““The court may either of its own motion or upon the application of the [district attorney], and the furtherance of justice, order an action or indictment to be dismissed; but in that case the reasons of the dismissal must be set forth in the order, which must be entered upon the minutes.” (Emphasis added.) The subsequent section 817, provides: “An order for the dismissal of the action, as provided in this Article, is not a bar to any other prosecution for the same offense.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Taylor v. State · Claghorn v. Brown““Where defendant had not been in jeopardy, a dismissal of the prosecution under the statutes cited above, was not a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense.” at page 218 of 422 P.2d. We therefore hold in the instant matter:”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Claghorn v. Brown““An order for the dismissal of the action, as provided in this Article, is not a bar to any other prosecution for the same offense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Taylor 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.