People v. Garrett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e must interpret Section 459.5 as if it defined shoplifting to mean 'entering a commercial establishment with intent to commit theft .' ( Ibid. ) It noted that under section 484 the definition of theft includes taking property of another " 'by any false or fraudulent representation or pretense.' " ( Id. at p. 89, 203 Cal.Rptr.3d 369 .) The court said, "Using another person's credit card to purchase property without the card owner's consent is 'theft' under this definition.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 396 - People v. Brayton

2. “[E]ven assuming [Garrett] intended to commit felony identity theft, he could not have been charged with burglary under ... section 459 if the same act -- entering a store with the intent to purchase merchandise with a stolen credit card -- also constituted shoplifting under [s]ection 459.5.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Jimenez

3. “entering a commercial establishment with intent to commit [theft] while that establishment is open during regular business hours, where the value of the property that is taken or intended to be taken does not exceed nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2 Cal. 5th 858 - People v. Gonzales