Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 882 P.2d 1096 - State v. Day

State v. Day’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2016

8 state decisions

40199420002010decided

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 97 Okla. Crim. 356 - Hisel v. State · Dawson 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “concealed because of fear induced by threats made by the wrongdoer, or anyone acting in pari delicto with the wrongdoer.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"C. Prosecutions for the crime of rape or forcible sodomy, pursuant to Sections 888, 1111, 1111.1, 1113 or 1114 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes, shall be commenced within seven (7) years after the discovery of the crime." [5] (emphasis added).”
    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.