Wood v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[u]nder Article II, Section 19 of the Oklahoma Constitution, as amended, the right of a trial by jury remains inviolate. However, the Constitution does not require that the jury, once issues of fact have been presented to it and it has determined that an accused it [sic] guilty of the crime charged, must assess punishment. As stated in 23A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 1141, where the fine or period of imprisonment is fixed by law, it is usually for the court and not for the jury to assess it unless such power is conferred on a jury by constitutional or statutory provision. In Oklahoma a defendant's right to have a jury assess punishment is a matter of statute, 22 O.S. § 926 and § 927. It should also be noted that in the syllabus of the Court in Burtt v. State, 64 Okl.Cr. 68 , 77 P.2d 580 [1938], this Court held that § 927, which permits the trial court to assess punishment when the jury fails to do so, is not unconstitutional as depriving a defendant of his right to trial by jury.”

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

2. “set an indeterminate sentence [of not less than ten (10) years nor more than life] ... on a finding of guilty by the jury of murder in the second degree.”

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

3. “for the reason that it deprives a defendant of his right to have the jury assess punishment.”

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