J.D.P. v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2022
9 state decisions
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 Trolinger v. State · W.D.C. v. State · Harris v. State · K.L.J. v. State · JLS 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether or not the proof is sufficient lies within the discretion of the magistrate; and on appeal, the magistrate's ruling will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. T.G.L. v. STATE · T.G.L. v. State“1. It was fundamental error and an abuse of discretion to bind the Appellant over for trial in the District Court as an adult based exclusively on inadmissible hearsay testimony; 2. Assuming arguendo that the hearsay testimony of the complaining witness' father was admissible, that hearsay testimony described only an act of indecent exposure, not lewd molestation, and juveniles charged with indecent exposure must be charged initially in the juvenile division of the District Court where the burden of proof for certification as an adult is on the State; and, 3. Assuming arguendo that sufficient admissible evidence was submitted to establish probable cause for the reverse certification offense of lewd molestation, it was fundamental error and an abuse of discretion to bind the Appellant over for trial in the District Court as an adult, when all available expert testimony established that the Appellant should be certified as a juvenile.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. JDP v. State“after giving consideration to those guidelines enumerated in the statute. See 10 O.S.Supp. 1997, § 7306-2.6(E)(3). ¶ 6 The provisions of the Youthful Offender Act do not specifically set forth the burden of proof to be applied in the trial court upon the accused's presentation of his or her motion for certification to the juvenile system. However, we find the provisions and language in 10 O.S.Supp.1997, § 7306-2.6 sufficiently similar to the language of the former”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. JDP v. State
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.