83 Okla. Crim. 392 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 1994
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 70 Okla. Crim. 304 - Ex Parte Meadows · 75 Okla. Crim. 275 - Dunbar v. State · 13 Okla. Crim. 472 - Ex Parte Hightower · 16 Okla. Crim. 579 - Coleman v. State · 11 Okla. Crim. 339 - Walker 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where verdict is irregular in form but is not objected to at time it is returned, and court given opportunity to have jury correct it, every intendment will be indulged to uphold it, and, where from examination of verdict and entire record intent of jury as ex1 pressed in verdict may be clearly ascertained, it will be upheld.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Wiley v. State · Hill v. State““If the jury render a verdict not in form, the court may, with proper instructions as to the law, direct them to reconsider it, and it cannot be recorded until it be rendered in some form from which it can be clearly understood what is the intent of the jury" (Emphasis added)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The verdict in this instance is the very essence of the conclusion of the trial, so far as this defendant was concerned. He was entitled to know when found guilty, what penalty the jury imposed. Upon being found guilty, and the jury fixing the punishment by confinement in the penitentiary, the defendant was certainly entitled to know the length of time he would be required to serve. Verdicts should not be returned in such form as to be left dangling in the realm of speculation. The verdict should be in such form that the judgment and sentence, in a criminal case, should never bepome a matter of guesswork on the part of the court. Courts dealing with life and liberty have no right to dispense what might be termed speculative, or ‘bucket shop justice’.””
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.