78 Okla. Crim. 36 - Yoder v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. ““Where larceny has been committed and asportation has terminated) one not connected with original taking, either as principal or as aider or abettor, but who thereafter, with knowledge that the property has been stolen, assists in concealing, selling or destroying stolen property, is not guilty of larceny.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 78 Okla. Crim. 258 - Cook v. State · 92 Okla. Crim. 37 - Mercer v. State

2. ““This is a felony case. The record discloses that the court instructed the jury orally, and not in writing, as provided by the Oklahoma Statutes, section 3057 O. S. 1931; 22 O. S. A. 1941 § 831, which is as follows: “ ‘6. * * * All instructions given shall be in writing unless waived by both parties, and shall be filed and become a part of the record in the case.’ “The record reveals that counsel for defendant waived his right to have the jury instructed in writing, and agreed that the court instruct them orally. We have held that where this waiver is made, the case will not be reversed by reason of such oral instructions. Elms v. State, 53 Okla. Cr. 268 , 10 P. 2d 728 ; Bird v. State, 22 Okla. Cr. 263 , 210 P. 925 ; Williams v. United States, 8 Cir., 158 F. 30 , 88 C.C.A. 296 . “But notwithstanding this, the court has often stated that it was the better practice for the court to instruct the jury in writing, and refrain from giving oral instructions. This is especially true in felony cases, and while it may not be reversible error, as above stated, we again reiterate that the better practice is for the court to give his instructions in writing, as provided by the statutes. Howard v. State, 39 Okla. Cr. 336 , 265 P. 149 ; Rea v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 281 , 105 P. 386 , 106 P. 982 ; Lunsford v. State, 53 Okla. Cr. 305 , 11 P. 2d 539 ; Bird v. State, 22 Okla. Cr. 263 , 210 P. 925 ; Elms v. State, 53 Okla. Cr. 268 , 10 P. 2d 728 ; Milam v. State, 24 Okla. Cr. 247 , 218 P. 168 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 81 Okla. Crim. 404 - Gatewood v. State