Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 P.3d 784 - State v. Carpenter

State v. Carpenter’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 2009
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Sealy, Inc. · Allen v. Oklahoma · State v. Thorne · State v. Manussier · In the Matter of Charles

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

  1. “Initially, the State counters that Carpenter's argument is an improper collateral attack on his 1996 conviction. We disagree. It is not a collateral attack because it is directed to the present use of a prior conviction to prove that Carpenter is a persistent offender. Moreover, the State bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that two applicable prior convictions exist when seeking a POAA sentence. Thus, Carpenter's argument first raised at sentencing, as it relates to his persistent offender status, is a proper defense to the State's proof and we address it.”
    2 later decisions 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.