Vaughn v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 2006
2 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 Sandstrom v. Montana · Jetton v. State · Tahdooahnippah v. State · Rushing v. State · Campbell 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“THE COURT: We hear an awful lot in this day and age about rights of defendants. The State of Oklahoma has rights also. The District Attorney’s office representing the people of the State of Oklahoma have rights. Is anyone unable for any reason to give the State of Oklahoma a fair and impartial trial? (Tr. 8-9). * * * * * * THE COURT: I would like to at this point say one thing about circumstantial evidence_ [I]n most crimes ... there is no direct evidence. Generally crimes are not committed on the 50-yard line Saturday afternoon when OU plays Nebraska. They generally aren’t committed out in the wide open public. Crimes are generally supported by circumstantial evidence and so, that is the difference between circumstantial and direct. Direct you see the crime_ Circumstantial is anything else. (Tr. 104). * * ⅜< * ⅜! * THE COURT: Now, I mentioned the words burden of proof. In a criminal case burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Makes interesting television, perhaps. Generally you hear about beyond a shadow of a doubt. Well, no such animal in the law. It is beyond a reasonable doubt. (Tr. 13). * * * * * * THE COURT: If your answers would be different to questions you have heard, how would they be different? MRS. CLINTON: I can think of one thing. About seven or eight years ago my 90 year old grandfather was beaten and robbed and left for the dead.... I wanted to call it to your attention. THE COURT: This may be a similar fact situation. You see, I have not heard the f”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Diaz v. State
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.