State v. Lansman’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2013
4 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 State v. Thompson · Huffman v. State · 96 Okla. Crim. 118 - Moore v. State · 24 Ala. App. 133 - Padgett v. State · People v. Humphries
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The essential elements of the crime are these: 1. Intent to defraud; 2, securing money, credit or other thing of value by means of a check, draft or written order; and 3, knowingly not having any arrangement, understanding, or funds with the bank, person or corporation upon which the check or other instrument is drawn sufficient to meet or pay the same.” ****** “It will be noted here the state offered no evidence from the drawee bank as to the insufficiency of the funds, or lack of arrangement or understanding. It is aided, however, by section 713.4 which says a showing the check was refused by the drawee shall be material and competent evidence of such lack of arrangement or funds. When the state showed the check had been returned unpaid it had made a prima facie case on which it was entitled to have the jury’s verdict.” ****** ■“Section 713.4, until the evidence which it makes available to the state is conclusively rebutted, also makes proper an inference of fraudulent intent.” ****** ■“But if the showing, whether it be labeled a presumption or an inference of fact, provided for the state by section 713.4 is conclusively rebutted, either by the state’s own case or by the defendant, the evidence of fraudulent intent falls and there is nothing to submit to the jury.” tv ■Jr "Jr ■K* if “In other words, the fact the funds or credit are not available for payment when the instrument is presented brings the presumption or inference of fact into play.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.