Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 state decisions

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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"When an examining magistrate rules that the evidence offered by the State is insufficient to hold the accused over for trial on the charge, such a ruling is binding and final on him and any other examining magistrate unless the State produces additional evidence or proves the existence of other good cause to justify a subsequent preliminary examination." 481 P.2d at 171 . "Furthermore, upon refiling a prosecution under these circumstances, the magistrate at the subsequent preliminary examination must be convinced that additional competent evidence has been offered which requires re-examination of the prior dismissal before that ruling can be set aside. The magistrate at a subsequent preliminary examination for the same defendant on the same charge should not consider the matter anew as on first impression as a prior dismissal is binding and final until overcome by additional evidence. 481 P.2d at 172 . "* * * "A magistrate's dismissal at preliminary examination for lack of sufficient evidence to hold defendant for trial shall not be disturbed unless competent evidence additional to that offered at a prior preliminary provides a basis to hold the defendant for trial." 481 P.2d at 170 .”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. West v. State · Walker v. Schneider

2. ““Although by statute in Oklahoma, one who ‘aids and abets’ is a principal in a crime, a conviction cannot be obtained if there is ‘no proof of a conspiracy or prearranged plan’ between the alleged abettor and the one who actually commits the crime. Anderson v. State, 66 Okl.Cr. 291 , 91 P.2d 794 (1939). Absent proof of conspiracy, a conviction cannot be sustained . . .’’at page 173 of 481 P.2d.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Vanostrum v. State · Dupree v. State

3. “There was nothing in the evidence to show that the defendant had entered into a conspiracy with the vendor of the narcotics to engage in the selling of narcotics or that the defendant had acted in the transaction in any way as the agent of the vendor or on her behalf or that he was associated in any way with the enterprise of the vendor or that he had any personal or financial interest in bringing trade to her. The motion to dismiss the indictment should therefore have been granted. One who acts solely as the agent of the buyer cannot be convicted of the crime of selling narcotics. People v. Buster, 286 App. Div. 1141 , 145 N.Y.S. 2d 437 ; People v. Pasquarello, 282 App. Div. 405 , 123 N.Y.S. 2d 98 , affirmed 306 N.Y. 759 , 118 N.E. 2d 361 . . . .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Simione