97 Okla. Crim. 190 - Eakin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. ““The defendant relies principally upon the case of Saferite v. State, 67 Okl.Cr. 229 , 93 P.2d 762 . We have no quarrel with the principles therein announced, but as was observed in Traxler v. State [ 96 Okl.Cr. 231 ], 251 F.2d 815 , * * * there was a misapplication of the law for the author of that opinion substituted this court for the jury as the trier of the facts and the conviction was actually reversed on the facts rather than the law. If we were to reverse this case it would be upon the same erroneous assumption. Where a jury is waived and the judge sits as the trier of the facts and there is evidence reasonably tending to support his findings, we are without authority of law to vacate or set aside those findings on appeal, for under such conditions, the finding of fact is within the sole and exclusive province of the trial judge to make. Of course if there is no evidence reasonably tending to support his findings the converse of the rule would be true and we would re verse the trial judge, but such is not the situation herein presented.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Webber v. State · Phillips v. State

2. ““5. Intent to commit larceny is a question of fact to be determined by the jury under the circumstances and the evidence or the trial court where a jury has been waived.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lamascus v. State