MIMS v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently October 1999 · most notably Richardson v. State (1999), United States v. Johnson (1970)
3 federal appellate · 47 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 Christen v. State · McAdams v. State · Steffler v. State · Dedrick v. State · Carter v. State
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Exclusive possession of property shown to have been stolen, shortly after the larceny, unquestionably is a circumstance to be considered by the jury, and if proof is made that such larceny was recently committed and there is no evidence to explain the possession of the defendants, a larceny conviction based upon such evidence will be sustained on appeal. . . .””
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Gaddie v. State · Green v. State““Since ... a person charged with automobile banditry embodying the charge of larceny could be found guilty of the lesser included offense of larceny, it necessarily follows that such person .cannot properly be sentenced and have judgment rendered against him for more than the greater offense encompassed in the charge of automobile banditry, . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“difficult to contemplate a state of facts giving rise to a more probable likelihood of guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gaddie v. State
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.