State v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
83 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently September 2005 · most notably State v. Gardner (1986), State v. Jones (1965)
83 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. . Weinstein · State v. McLamb · State v. Ardrey · State v. Bennett · State v. Booker
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Section 1. That the larceny of and receiving of stolen goods knowing them to be stolen, of the value of not more than twenty dollars, is hereby declared a misdemeanor, (our italics) and the punishment therefor shall be in the discretion of the court. If the larceny is from the person or from the dwelling by breaking and entering, this section shall have no application: Provided, that this act shall not apply to horse stealing; Provided, further, that this act shall have no application to indictments or presentments now pending nor to acts or offenses committed prior to the ratification of this act. “Sec. 2. That the Superior Court of North Carolina shall have exclusive jurisdiction of the trial of all cases of the larceny of or the receiving of stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen, of the value of more than twenty dollars. “Sec. 3. That all laws and clauses of laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Benfield““True, ‘felonious intent’ is an essential element of the crime of larceny without regard to the value of the stolen property. The phrase, ‘felonious intent,’ originated when both grand larceny and petit larceny were felonies. Now, ‘felonious intent,’ in the law of larceny, does not necessarily signify an intent to commit a felony. For definitions of ‘felonious intent,’ as an element of the crime of larceny, see S. v. Powell, 103 N.C. 424 , 9 S.E. 627 ; S. v. Kirkland, 178 N.C. 810 , 101 S.E. 560 ; S. v. Booker, 250 N.C. 272 , 108 S.E. 2d 426 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Section 1. That in all cases of larceny where the value of the property stolen does not exceed twenty dollars, the punishment shall, for the first offense, not exceed punishment in the penitentiary, or common jail, for a longer term than one year. “Sec. 2. That if the larceny is from the person, or from the dwelling by breaking and entering in the day time, section one of this act shall have no application. “Sec. 3. That in all cases of doubt, the jury shall, in the verdict, fix the value of the property stolen.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Benfield
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.