17 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1909–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oklahoma courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Powell v. Stategreen2 sentences2009See Powell v. State, 2000 OK CR 5, ¶ 68 , 995 P.2d 510, 527 . 2009See Powell v. State, 2000 OK CR 5, ¶ 68 , 995 P.2d 510, 527 . | 1 | 1 |
Hill v. Stategreen2 sentences2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). 2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). | 1 | 1 |
Poplin v. Stategreen2 sentences1999See Poplin v. State, 761 P.2d 905, 906-907 (Okl.Cr.1988) (failure to give requested instruction concerning no adverse inference from defendant’s failure to testify subjected to harmless error analysis and found to be harmless in light of absence of any resulting prejudice). 1999See Poplin v. State, 761 P.2d 905, 906-907 (Okl.Cr.1988) (failure to give requested instruction concerning no adverse inference from defendant's failure to testify subjected to harmless error analysis and found to be harmless in light of absence of any resulting prejudice). | 1 | 1 |
Atterberry v. Stategreen1 sentence1997In fact, the record gives the impression the trial court would have considered the defense if it had been raised at trial pursuant to section 33. 3 Just as the trial court has the duty in a criminal prosecution to correctly instruct a jury on the salient features of the law raised by the evidence, even without a request by the defendant, Atterberry v. State, 731 P.2d 420, 422 (Okl.Cr.1986), the judge has the duty in a non-jury trial (acting as trier of fact) to consider all of the applicable law as it pertains to the State’s burden of proof and the defenses raised. | 1 | 1 |
Pierce v. Stategreen1 sentence1989See Pierce v. State, 766 P.2d 365, 366-67 (Okla.Crim.App.1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Watts v. State
green
2 sentences2018In Watts, 2008 OK CR 27 , ¶ 9, 194 P.3d at 137 we found no plain error in the omission of an instruction on the defendant's ineligibility for some institutional earned credits to reduce his prison sentence as such an instruction would introduce highly speculative factors into jury sentencing decisions. 2018In Watts, 2008 OK CR 27 , ¶ 9, 194 P.3d at 137 we found no plain error in the omission of an instruction on the defendant's ineligibility for some institutional earned credits to reduce his prison sentence as such an instruction would introduce highly speculative factors into jury sentencing decisions. | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Chapman v. State
green
2 sentences1956Cordonnier v. State, 86 Okl.Cr. 291 , 192 P.2d 298 ; It has further been held an omission of an instruction in the absence of a request will not constitute reversible error, Chapman v.. State, 84 Okl.Cr. 41 , 178 P.2d 638 , particularly unless the Criminal Court of Appeals believes in light of the entire record, and instructions, the defendant was deprived of substantial justice. 1956Cordonnier v. State, 86 Okl.Cr. 291 , 192 P.2d 298 ; It has further been held an omission of an instruction in the absence of a request will not constitute reversible error, Chapman v.. State, 84 Okl.Cr. 41 , 178 P.2d 638 , particularly unless the Criminal Court of Appeals believes in light of the entire record, and instructions, the defendant was deprived of substantial justice. | 2 | 1953–1956 |
Paxton v. State
green
2 sentences2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). 2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Soo Hoo v. United States Parole Commission
green
1 sentence2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Naddi v. California
green
2 sentences2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, 121 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, 114 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 518 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 158 (1994). 2004See Hill v. State, 1995 OK CR 28, ¶ 21 , 898 P.2d 155, 163 (such statutory error can be waived by failing to object); Paxton v. State, 1993 OK CR 59, ¶ 14 , 867 P.2d 1309, 1318 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 886 , 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Mills v. State
green
1 sentence1988Mills v. State, 594 P.2d 374 (Okl.Cr.1979). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. v. Harper
green
2 sentences1987Missouri-Kansas-Texas R Co. v. Harper, 468 P.2d 1014 (Okl.1970). 1987Missouri-Kansas-Texas R Co. v. Harper, 468 P.2d 1014 (Okl. 1970). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Cordonnier v. State
green
2 sentences1956Cordonnier v. State, 86 Okl.Cr. 291 , 192 P.2d 298 ; It has further been held an omission of an instruction in the absence of a request will not constitute reversible error, Chapman v.. State, 84 Okl.Cr. 41 , 178 P.2d 638 , particularly unless the Criminal Court of Appeals believes in light of the entire record, and instructions, the defendant was deprived of substantial justice. 1956Cordonnier v. State, 86 Okl.Cr. 291 , 192 P.2d 298 ; It has further been held an omission of an instruction in the absence of a request will not constitute reversible error, Chapman v.. State, 84 Okl.Cr. 41 , 178 P.2d 638 , particularly unless the Criminal Court of Appeals believes in light of the entire record, and instructions, the defendant was deprived of substantial justice. | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Fields v. State
green
2 sentences1956Fields v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 439 , 188 P.2d 231 .” To the same effect is Nance v. State, 43 Okl.Cr. 247 , 278 P. 357 . 1956Fields v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 439 , 188 P.2d 231 .” To the same effect is Nance v. State, 43 Okl.Cr. 247 , 278 P. 357 . | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Nance v. State
neutral
2 sentences1956Fields v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 439 , 188 P.2d 231 .” To the same effect is Nance v. State, 43 Okl.Cr. 247 , 278 P. 357 . 1956Fields v. State, 85 Okl.Cr. 439 , 188 P.2d 231 .” To the same effect is Nance v. State, 43 Okl.Cr. 247 , 278 P. 357 . | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Allen v. Commonwealth
neutral
2 sentences1943The use of the word ‘steal’ in an instruction has been held to import sufficiently a felonious intent.” In the case of Allen v. Commonwealth, 144 Ky. 222 , 137 S.W. 1060 , it is said: “Appellant claims the lower court erred in instructing the jury. 1943The use of the word ‘steal’ in an instruction has been held to import sufficiently a felonious intent.” In the case of Allen v. Commonwealth, 144 Ky. 222 , 137 S.W. 1060 , it is said: “Appellant claims the lower court erred in instructing the jury. | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Gourley v. City of Oklahoma City
neutral
2 sentences1942Gourley v. Oklahoma City, 104 Okla. 210 , 230 P. 923 . 1942Gourley v. Oklahoma City, 104 Okla. 210 , 230 P. 923 . | 1 | 1942–1942 |
Perry v. Myers
neutral
2 sentences1935In the case of an omission or error in the record, the power exists in the court below to amend such record, so that it may conform to the actual facts and truth of the case.” This same rule is announced in the case of Perry v. Myers, 127 Okla. 27 , 259 P. 556 , decided by this court in 1927, where an affidavit of one of the counsel for plaintiffs in error was attached to case-made, setting out that counsel made proper exceptions to certain instructions given by the court and to the action of the court in refusing to give requested instructions, but that they were overlooked by the judge and l 1935In the case of an omission or error in the record, the power exists in the court below to amend such record, so that it may conform to the actual facts and truth of the case.” This same rule is announced in the case of Perry v. Myers, 127 Okla. 27 , 259 P. 556 , decided by this court in 1927, where an affidavit of one of the counsel for plaintiffs in error was attached to case-made, setting out that counsel made proper exceptions to certain instructions given by the court and to the action of the court in refusing to give requested instructions, but that they were overlooked by the judge and l | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Oklahoma Fire Ins. Co. v. Kimpel
neutral
1 sentence1927Oklahoma Fire Insurance Co. v. Kimpel, 39 Okla. 399 , 135 Pac. 6 . | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Thompson v. Cade and Kelly
neutral
2 sentences1913Thompson v. Cade, 14 Okla. 337 , 79 Pac. 96 ; Bettis v. Cargile, 23 Okla. 301 , 100 Pac. 436 . 1913Thompson v. Cade, 14 Okla. 337 , 79 Pac. 96 ; Bettis v. Cargile, 23 Okla. 301 , 100 Pac. 436 . | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Petty v. State
neutral
1 sentence1913Thompson v. Cade, 14 Okla. 337 , 79 Pac. 96 ; Bettis v. Cargile, 23 Okla. 301 , 100 Pac. 436 . | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Bettis v. Cargile
neutral
1 sentence1913Thompson v. Cade, 14 Okla. 337 , 79 Pac. 96 ; Bettis v. Cargile, 23 Okla. 301 , 100 Pac. 436 . | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Michigan Central Railroad v. Hale
neutral
1 sentence1909We believe the rule to be now well settled that the common-law liability of a common carrier cannot be so restricted for, notwithstanding the notice, the owner has a right to insist that the carrier shall receive and carry the goods subject to all the incidents of his employment; and there can be no presumption, when they are delivered and received by the carrier, that the owner intended to abandon any of his legal rights, or'yield to the wishes of the carrier.” In Railroad Company v. Hale, 6 Mich. 243 , a case in which the limitation of the liability of the company was indorsed on the back of | 1 | 1909–1909 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.