10 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Coulter v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Coulter v. State, 721 P.2d 818, 819 (Okl.Cr.1986). 1999Coulter v. State, 721 P.2d 818, 819 (Okl.Cr.1986). | 3 | 3 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences1987See White v. State, 458 P.2d 322, 327 (Okl.Cr.1969). 1987See White v. State, 458 P.2d 322, 327 (Okl.Cr. 1969). | 2 | 2 |
Nauni v. Stategreen2 sentences1986Nauni v. State, 670 P.2d 126 (Okl.Cr.1983). 1985See, Nauni v. State, 670 P.2d 126 (Okl.Cr. 1983). | 1 | 2 |
Cherbonnier v. Stategreen2 sentences1991See Cherbonnier v. State, 751 P.2d 1098, 1099 (Okl.Cr.1988). 1991See Cherbonnier v. State, 751 P.2d 1098, 1099 (Okl.Cr. 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Broaddrick v. Stategreen1 sentence1987As I stated in Broaddrick v. State, 706 P.2d 534, 537-38 (Okl.Cr.1985) (Parks, P.J., Specially Concurring): This [is] clearly contrary to 22 O.S.1981, § 834, which states, in pertinent part, that ‘questions of law are to be decided by the court, and questions of fact are to be decided by the jury....’ Our current approach — the practice of this State since time immemorial — has been to require the trial court to give a theory of defense instruction, if requested, when there is any evidence in the record to support the defense, and even if the evidence is discredited. | 1 | 1 |
Dilworth v. Stategreen1 sentence1983Dil- *134 worth v. State, 611 P.2d 256, 259 (Okl.Cr.1980). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Price v. Price
green
2 sentences2011"This Court will not accept unsupported statements in the brief, or statements made in argument of counsel to the *910 trial court, otherwise unsupported, as a basis for appellate decision." Price v. Price, 1970 OK 116, 18 , 471 P2d 894, 896 . 2011"This Court will not accept unsupported statements in the brief, or statements made in argument of counsel to the *910 trial court, otherwise unsupported, as a basis for appellate decision." Price v. Price, 1970 OK 116, 18 , 471 P2d 894, 896 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Grayson v. State
green
1 sentence1988Grayson v. State, 687 P.2d 747 (Okl.Cr.1984). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.