Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 887 P2D 290 - Parker v. State

Parker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 2022

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

701994200020102020decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Murphy v. Florida · Kliewer v. New Jersey · San Vicente Medical Partners, Ltd. v. Orr · Collins v. Illinois

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

  1. “Because the bench conferences were held outside the hearing of the jury, we are not inclined to include them in a blanket rule which would require automatic reversal as is the case with other portions of the trial such as jury selection. Lack of record of bench conferences does not hinder our ability to conduct the mandatory sentence review required under the Oklahoma Statutes. Conferences at the bench, while potentially effecting (sic) the actual evidence presented or the manner in which the evidence is presented, do not in and of themselves influence our determination of "whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor." Section 7OL13(C)(1). Problems involving the rulings resulting from the conferences are easily appealed in their own right.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor.”
    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.