Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 P2D 763 - Songer v. State

Songer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
November 1986
most recently cited

13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 94 Okla. Crim. 110 - Hathcox v. State · 96 Okla. Crim. 198 - Paschall v. State · Young v. State · Jones v. State · Britt 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““If defendant’s counsel is surprised at such action and such endorsement of an additional witness requires a production of further testimony by defendant, he should withdraw his announcement of ready for trial and should file a motion for a postponement or a continuance in which he should set out the facts constituting such surprise, and the other evidence, if any, he could produce to rebut the testimony of such additional witness if the trial of the case was continued. Where he fails to do this the error, if any, is waived.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Although a trial court should guard against the admission of testimony relating to separate and distinct offenses for which the defendant is not presently on trial, it is the rule of this Court, as announced in Jones v. State, Okl.Cr., 321 P.2d 432 (1958): “ ‘The evidence of other crimes in order to be admissible must come within one of the well recognized exceptions to the rule. . .”
    3 later decisions 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.