Hackney v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 2018
8 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 Bourjaily v. United States · Spuehler v. State · VanWoundenberg v. State · Vanwoudenberg v. Oklahoma · United States v. Smith
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n Johns v. State, 742 P.2d 1142, 1146-47 (Okl.Cr.1987), this Court held that independent evidence is not necessary where co-conspirator statements are admitted through direct trial testimony subject to cross-examination, because the direct testimony of co-conspirators is not hearsay. A co-conspirator may testify concerning his own participation and his observation of a co-conspirators' conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Co-conspirators are responsible for all that is said and done pursuant to the conspiracy until its purpose is accomplished.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. MITCHELL v. STATE“from which the existence of a conspiracy may be inferred.”
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.