Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 Okla. 175 - Marshall v. Sitton

Marshall v. Sitton’s Empirical Analysis

1918

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 1962
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 1962

7 state decisions

20191819201930194019501960decided

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 In re Winn · Evans v. Willis, County Judge · Re Frank D Winn · Goulding Fertilizer Co. v. Blanchard · State ex rel. Board of Education v. Nast

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

  1. ““The object of a preliminary examination is to inform the defendant of the nature and character of the crime charged against him and to lay a preliminary foundation for the prosecution in a court of record, to inquire concerning the commission of the crime charged and the connection of the accused therewith,, and to determine whether there is probable cause to believe him guilty so that the state may take the necessary steps to perpetuate testimony and determine the amount of bail which will probably secure the attendance of the accused to answer. State v. Pigg, 80 Kan. 481 , 103 Pac. 121 , 18 Ann. Cas. 521; Harris v. Rolette, 16 N. D. 204 , 112 N. W. 971 ; Bishop’s New Criminal Procedure, § 239. The conduct of such examination is not the exercise of any part of the judicial power of the county court as a court of record, but the county judge in the conduct thereof exercises only the powers and jurisdiction that a justice of the peace would exercise when acting as a magistrate in preliminary examinations. State v. Pigg, supra; United States v. Hughes (D. C.), 70 Fed. 972 ; State v. Nast, 209 Mo. 708 , 108 S. W. 563 ; Bishop’s New Criminal Procedure, § 237.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““County courts shall also have and exercise the jurisdiction of examining and committing magistrates in all criminal cases.””
    1 later decision 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.