92 Okla. Crim. 320 - Uto v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 64 Cal. App. 474 - Grillich v. Weinshenk · 85 Okla. Crim. 25 - Hughes v. State · 1 Okla. Crim. 358 - Price v. State · 85 Okla. Crim. 87 - Savalier v. State · 10 Okla. Crim. 417 - Harris 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This court has repeatedly condemned similar instructions attempting to define reasonable doubt. In Moore v. State, 90 Okla. Cr. 415 , 214 P. 2d 966, 968 , an able opinion by Judge Powell, it was said: “ ‘We are at a loss to understand why the trial court gave the instruction complained of when such an instruction has been condemned in this jurisdiction from territorial days on to the present time. The first case reported in Oklahoma Criminal Reports and being Abbott v. Territory, 1 Okla. Cr. 1 , 94 P. 179 , 16 L.R.A., N.S. 260, 129 Am. St. Rep. 818 , is an opinion by Williams, C. J. (1908), basic reasons for the rule were detailed, and it was held: “An instruction which states ‘by the term “reasonable doubt” is meant a doubt that has a reason for it; it is a doubt you can give a reason for’ — was erroneous, and is cause for reversal of the judgment.” “ ‘See also: Gibbons v. Territory, 1 Okla. Cr. 198 , 96 P. 466 ; Price v. State, 1 Okla. Cr. 358 , 98 P. 447 ; Reeves v. Territory, 2 Okla. Cr. 82 , 99 P. 1021 ; Gragg v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 409 , 106 P. 350 , Morgan v. State, 7 Okla. Cr. 45 , 121 P. 1088 ; Harris v. State, 10 Okla. Cr. 417 , 137 P. 365 , 139 P. 846 ; Gransden v. State, 12 Okla. Cr. 417 , 158 P. 157 ; Soper v. State, 22 Okla. Cr. 27 , 208 P. 1044 ; Hammons v. State, 80 Okla. Cr. 33 , 156 P. 2d 379 .’ “For further consideration of the conditions under which such instruction has been held not erroneous see the opinion supra, none of which conditions therein discuss”
2 later decisions 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.