Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 74 Okla. Crim. 13 - Harris v. State

74 Okla. Crim. 13 - Harris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
July 1981
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 1981

7 state decisions

2019421950196019701980decided

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 69 Okla. Crim. 128 - Thoreson v. State · Dunn v. United States · Hayes v. United States · Epps v. United States · Hastings v. United States

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 purpose of ch. 16, Laws 1939, 37 O.S. 1941 §§ 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, is to provide for importation under permit system for certain limited and specified purposes only, and a provision prohibiting importation without permit for all purposes is essential to make the act effective and is referable and cognate to the subject expressed in the title which recites that the act creates and provides for permit system for importation and transportation of liquor into the state for' scientific, sacramental, medicinal, or mechanical purposes, and forbids importation of such liquor without a permit.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Only one offense may be stated in an information; but where the same acts may constitute different offenses or the proof may be uncertain as to which of the two or more offenses the accused may be guilty of, the different offenses may be set forth in separate counts in the same information; and the accused may be convicted of either offense. He may not be convicted of two offenses under one information.””
    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.