Holder v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Virtually, especially under the circumstances of the instant case, the proof necessary to sustain a conviction under one statute would likewise sustain a conviction under the other, with the exception of an additional element in Section 843. That element being the-buiden of the State to demonstrate, under Section 843, that the victim was under the age of seventeen.” 18 Holder, 1976 OK CR 288, ¶ 18 , 556 P.2d at 1053 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Atterberry v. State · Fairchild v. State

2. “Any parent or other person who shall willfully or maliciously injure, torture, maim, or use unreasonable force upon a child under the age of eighteen (18), or who shall cause, procure or permit any of said acts to be done, shall be punished by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary not exceeding twenty (20) years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one (1) year, or by a fine of not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or both such fine and imprisonment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Atterberry v. State

3. “We are of the opinion that the statute is sufficiently clear and explicit that all persons of ordinary intelligence could understand its provisions. A person of common intelligence would not necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Workman v. State