Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Oklahoma opinions name it 3 courts 2002–2023 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2023Since the factual basis for this aspect of Petitioner's omnibus claim was not ascertainable through the exercise of reasonable diligence in a prior proceeding, Petitioner must now show both that initial post-conviction counsel's performance "fell below an objective standard of reasonableness" and that "the deficient performance prejudiced the defense." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 (1984). ¶25 If this Court determines that both deficient performance and prejudice resulted in an error , that is, a violation of the statutory right to post-conviction counsel, we will then assess whether "but for 2023Since the factual basis for this aspect of Petitioner's omnibus claim was not ascertainable through the exercise of reasonable diligence in a prior proceeding, Petitioner must now show both that initial post-conviction counsel's performance "fell below an objective standard of reasonableness" and that "the deficient performance prejudiced the defense." Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 (1984). ¶25 If this Court determines that both deficient performance and prejudice resulted in an error , that is, a violation of the statutory right to post-conviction counsel, we will then assess whether "but for | 3 | 3 |
O'NEILL v. Longgreen2 sentences2006The Hudsons contracted with Allstate to provide their owners policy and, having accepted that contract, Allstate was required to provide that policy “in accordance with coverage required by the Compulsory Liability Insurance Law of Oklahoma.” 47 O.S.2001 § 7-600.KA). ¶ 21 The omnibus clause creates liability coverage in favor of permitted users and “protects third parties wrongfully injured by the use of the insured vehicle by persons other than the owner.” O’Neill, 2002 OK 63 at ¶ 10 , 54 P.3d at 112 . 2006The Hudsons contracted with Allstate to provide their owners policy and, having accepted that contract, Allstate was required to provide that policy “in accordance with coverage required by the Compulsory Liability Insurance Law of Oklahoma.” 47 O.S.2001 § 7-600.KA). ¶ 21 The omnibus clause creates liability coverage in favor of permitted users and “protects third parties wrongfully injured by the use of the insured vehicle by persons other than the owner.” O’Neill, 2002 OK 63 at ¶ 10 , 54 P.3d at 112 . | 1 | 2 |
Hartline v. Hartlinegreen2 sentences2002Hartline v. Hartline, 2001 OK 15, ¶ 15 , 39 P.3d 765, 771, note 22 . 2002Hartline v. Hartline, 2001 OK 15, ¶ 15 , 39 P.3d 765, 771, note 22 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
DAVISON v. STATE
neutral
2 sentences2023Because the factual basis of this claim was available in prior proceedings, further review, or relief on this aspect of Petitioner's omnibus claim is procedurally barred in a second post-conviction proceeding. ¶12 In the second section of Petitioner's omnibus ineffectiveness claim, he argues that trial counsel failed to adequately "investigate, prepare, and litigate" the sentencing stage of trial. 3 Current counsel identifies several areas of evidence that trial counsel allegedly failed to fully develop and effectively present in the penalty phase of trial; including evidence of organic brain 2023Because the factual basis of this claim was available in prior proceedings, further review, or relief on this aspect of Petitioner's omnibus claim is procedurally barred in a second post-conviction proceeding. ¶12 In the second section of Petitioner's omnibus ineffectiveness claim, he argues that trial counsel failed to adequately "investigate, prepare, and litigate" the sentencing stage of trial. 3 Current counsel identifies several areas of evidence that trial counsel allegedly failed to fully develop and effectively present in the penalty phase of trial; including evidence of organic brain | 3 | 2023–2023 |
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Iowa Home Mutual Casualty Co.
green
2 sentences2002The omnibus clause creates liability insurance in favor of permissive users in addition to the named insured(s) or other persons insured in the policy. 6 Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Iowa Home Mutual Casualty Company, 1965 OK 87 , 405 P.2d 160, 165 . 2002The omnibus clause creates liability insurance in favor of permissive users in addition to the named insured(s) or other persons insured in the policy. 6 Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Iowa Home Mutual Casualty Company, 1965 OK 87 , 405 P.2d 160, 165 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.