Banks v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• refusing to grant an out-of-time appeal to a defendant who failed to follow the provisions of OCCA Rule 2.1 and stating, “We must insist that our rules are followed consistently”
• refusing to grant an out-of-time appeal to a defendant who failed to follow the provisions of OCCA Rule 2.1 and stating, “[w]e must insist that our rules are followed consistently”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Gibson v. Klinger
  Tenth Circuit· 2000-11-14· cited 674×
• Fitzgerald v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1998-12-10· cited 63×
• Orange v. Calbone
  Tenth Circuit· 2003-02-04· cited 30×
• Moore v. Gibson
  Tenth Circuit· 2001-05-10· cited 11×
• Dubuc v. Sirmons
  Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 2001-07-03· cited 8×
• MEYER v. ENGLE
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 2016-01-22· cited 5×
• Christopher Bivens v. Steve Hargett
  Tenth Circuit· 1999-01-11· cited 2×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Houston v. Lack
  Supreme Court· 1988-06-24· cited 6,563×
• State Ex Rel. Henry v. Mahler
  Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 1990-01-16· cited 36×
• Smith v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1980-05-20· cited 21×
• Austin v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1966-10-19· cited 18×
• Hunnicutt v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1997-12-16· cited 15×
• Behrens v. Patterson
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1997-12-16· cited 10×