Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 Okla. Crim. 36 - Kramer v. State

97 Okla. Crim. 36 - Kramer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
September 1988
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1988

8 state decisions

501953196019701980decided

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 76 Okla. Crim. 385 - Prather v. State · 82 Okla. Crim. 220 - Mendenhall v. State · 73 Okla. Crim. 67 - Booth 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The charge was embezzlement and the venue of the prosecution would lie in the county and state where the embezzlement occurred. After the sale of the property was made' in Texas, the mortgagor, under the statute, 46 O.S.1951 § 71, supra, became the trustee of the funds which he received for the benefit of the mortgagee;. When he brought the money to Oklahoma City and used it for a purpose inconsistent with his trust and to pay other debts of the Kramer -Motor Company or for, other purposes, the offense, if any, was committed in Oklahoma County.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““An accused [can not] be placed upon trial for two or more offenses at the same time, unless at his request, and then only in cases where the trial court can see that no prejudice would result to the defendant from joining the cases.””
    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.