State v. Labbitt’s Empirical Analysis
1945
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 2018
12 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 Louisville v. Woodson · State v. Fisher · State v. Welch · State v. Mahoney · Valley Mercantile Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is elementary that the taking of property temporarily and with the intention of returning it is not larceny. The animus furandi, or intent to steal, is an essential element of the crime of larceny. ‘It is this intent which distinguishes larceny from a mere civil trespass. Every taking of another’s property without legal justification is a trespass upon the owner’s right to its continued possession, but it does not constitute a crime unless the act is perpetrated feloniously, that is with animus furandi or with the intent to steal.’ 36 C.J. Larceny, see. 101, p. 763. ‘Every taking and carrying away by one person of the personal property of another is not larceny even though it is done without right or claim of right and for the purpose of appropriating the property to the use of the taker. Super-added to the wrongful taking there must be a felonious intent, for without it there would be only a bare trespass which, however aggravated, would not be crime. It is the criminal mind and purpose going with the act which distinguishes a criminal trespass from a mere civil injury.’ 32 Am. Jur., Larceny, see. 36, p. 925.’’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Smith““The practice of directing an acquittal whenever the evidence, in the discretion of the judge, fails to support the charge, is well recognized as a proper order in criminal procedure. * * * .” (Emphasis added.) 8 Mont. 327 . 20 p. 654.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cool“* * If, at any time after the evidence on either side is closed, the court deems it insufficient to warrant a conviction, it may advise the jury to acquit the defendant; but the jury is not bound by the advice.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cool
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.