Middaugh v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Hatch v. Oklahoma (1995), Sentinel Insurance Co. v. First Insurance Co. of Hawai'i, Ltd. (1994)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 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 Plunkett v. State · Glass v. State · Dilworth v. State · Vowell v. State · Dyke 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a rational and actual understanding of the proceedings against him.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lambert v. State · Perry v. State“). See also Middaugh v. State, 767 P.2d 432, 434-35 (Okl.Cr.1988) (mere fact appellant had been treated for a mental condition in the past, had a heart condition, and had a nervous condition was not enough to raise a sufficient doubt as to his mental capacity to stand trial”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Phillips v. State“The purpose of the chain of custody rule is to guard against substitution of or tampering with the evidence between the time it is found and the time it is analyzed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCarty 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.