232 N.J. Super. 300 - State v. Sein’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
May 1991
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Butler · State v. Smith · Commonwealth v. Jones · State v. Mirault · 52 N.J. Super. 316 - State v. Cottone
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he amended robbery statute, like the common law and N.J.S.A. 2A:141-1 (repealed), requires the application of force upon another greater than is necessary merely to remove the property from the victim’s person or control. Where, as here, the victim is completely surprised by a purse-snatcher and offers no resistance, and force is applied only to the purse in order to separate it from the owner, the crime is not a robbery. Such force is not directed “upon another” but instead upon the object itself. [ 232 N.J.Super. at 304-05 , 556 A.2d 1298 .]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Sein
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.