Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 265 N.C. 581 - State v. Holloway

State v. Holloway’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably State v. Miller (1967), State v. Mumford (2010)

28 state decisions

100196519701980199020002010decided

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. Cooper

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

  1. ““Evidence for the State tends to show: Approximately a week prior to May 21, 1963 an inventory was taken of television sets owned by Telerent, Inc., and stored in its warehouse at 613 West North Street, Raleigh, N. C. On May 23, 1963, upon discovering that many television sets were missing, employees of Telerent, Inc., took another inventory, determined that 37 sets were missing, and listed the model and serial numbers of the missing sets. Evidence for the State tends to show each of six of the television sets taken from said warehouse was in the possession of appellant alone or in the joint possession of appellant and his codefendants at a time generally identified as the last of May or the first of June 1963. As indicated, the State relies largely on the presumption arising from the possession of goods recently stolen. In our view, the evidence was sufficient to warrant submission to the jury; and defendant’s assignment of error directed to the denial of his motion for judgment as of nonsuit is without merit.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “that the verdict of not guilty as to the first count establishes that defendant did not commit the alleged larceny pursuant to an unlawful and felonious breaking and entering and therefore G.S. § 14-72, as amended, does not apply.”
    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.