State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The plain language of the robbery statute says the force used may be either to obtain or retain possession of the property. We hold the force necessary to support a robbery conviction need not be used in the initial acquisition of the property. Rather, the retention, via force against the property owner, of property initially taken peaceably or outside the presence of the property owner, is robbery.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Truong · 192 Wash. App. 721 - State Of Washington v. Adam Phillip Thomas

2. “The fatal flaw in Manchester’s argument is that it ignores the plain language of the statute: “force or fear . . . used to . . . retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking ...” . In each instance, it is undisputed that Manchester used force to retain at least some of the stolen property. In doing so, his actions fall squarely within the provisions of the statute.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 192 Wash. App. 721 - State Of Washington v. Adam Phillip Thomas

3. “attempt to broaden the transactional view of robbery beyond the statutory elements of the crime,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Truong