Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2004
3 federal appellate · 18 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 Young v. State · Jennings v. State · 79 Okla. Crim. 285 - Little v. State · 67 Okla. Crim. 16 - Kizer v. State · Webb 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“no useful purpose beyond that of educating the jury as to the often disproportionate ratio between sentence rendered and time served. The various reasons for reduction of sentence are not properly before the jury and neither should the results of these extraneous facts be before the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“create[ ] such confusion and uncertainty in the minds of the jury so as to render the verdict possibly unfair and violative of defendant's right to a fundamentally fair trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Watson v. Boone
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.