State v. Lentz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““. . . It is argued that many such hangers were manufactured and sold throughout the country, and that the finding of some of that kind in defendant’s possession did not constitute competent proof that they had been stolen from the store by the .defendant. The type of hangers being unusual and not in common use in the community, the finding of such hangers in defendant’s possession tended'in a degree to connect defendant with the offense. Although not strong, the evidence cannot be regarded as being destitute of probative value. It was not improper to admit the evidence and leave to the jury the determination of the weight to which it was entitled when considered in connection with the other evidence in the case touching the identity of the things charged to have been stolen by the defendant.” (p. 315.)”

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