State v. Handler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The prosecution must -identify stolen .property found in the possession of the accused with that for the theft of which he is indicted,, and this must be done by. the most direct and positive testimony of which the- case is susceptible.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. White · Haun v. State

2. ““Some of the cases cited by appellant were where the only evidence on the subject of identity was circumstantial. In the case at bar, the evidence was not circumstantial. The rule that such identifying testimony is required to be the most positive and direct of which the case is susceptible (17 K. C. L. 65) surely does not extend to the limit of an impossibility where two things look exactly alike. We think there was sufficient identification of the rims under the authorities above cited.””

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

3. ““ ‘Evidence of the price which the owner had paid for stolen property shortly before its theft, or which had been received for it or property of the same kind, since the theft, or which accused had refused to take for it, is sufficient to sustain a verdict based on the value so determined.’” (pp. 459-460.)”

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