Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 450 P2D 216 - Strunk v. State

Strunk v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
April 2007
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 2007

9 state decisions

6019691970198019902000decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Bumper v. North Carolina · Barber v. State · Cody v. State · Haga 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.

  1. ““The old rule of ‘resistance to the uttermost’ is obsolete, and is repudiated by the more modern authorities. The law does not require that the woman shall do more than her age, strength, and surrounding facts, and all attending circumstances make it reasonable for her to do in order to manifest her opposition. In reference to the degree of resistance required, the jury should be instructed that it is necessary, not that the prosecu-trix should have made the uttermost resistance, but that she has made such resistance as she was capable of making at the time.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““. . . FORREST K. WADE . . ., did then and there unlawfully, wilfully and feloniously with the use of force and violence and by means of threats of immediate and great bodily harm to one JOY BOLTON, a female person not the wife of the said defendant, overcome all resistance on the part of the said JOY BOLTON, and did then and there rape, ravish, carnally know and have sexual intercourse with said female against her will and consent, in violation of 21 O.S.A. 1114 . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Title 22 O.S.1981, § 304, provides: An information may be amended in matter of substance or form at any time before the defendant pleads, without leave, and may be amended after plea on order of the court where the same can be done without material prejudice to the right of the defendant; no amendment shall cause any delay of the trial, unless for good cause shown by affidavit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.