Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 266 N.C. 584 - State v. Lynch

State v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
October 1997
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently October 1997 · most notably State v. Fox (1968), State v. Spaulding (1975)

40 state decisions

2201966197019801990decided

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 Jackson v. Denno · Delli Paoli v. United States · State v. . Sawyer · State v. Walker · State v. Lawrence

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

  1. ““As to the variance with reference to the ownership of the stolen money, it is noted that ‘ [t] he gist of the offense [robbery] is not the taking, but a taking by force or the putting in fear.’ S. v. Sawyer, 224 N.C. 61, 65 , 29 S.E. 2d 34 , and cases cited. * * * ‘It is not essential to the crime of robbery that the property be taken from the actual holder of the legal title, a taking from one having the care, custody, control, management, or possession of the property being sufficient.’ 77 C.J.S., Robbery, § 7; 46 Am. Jur., Robbery, § 9.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Where two or more persons are jointly tried, the extrajudicial confession of one. defendant may be received in evidence over the objection of his codefendant (s) when, hut only when, the trial judge instructs the jury that the confession so offered is admitted in evidence against the defendant who made it but is not evidence and is not to be considered by the jury in any way in determining the charges against his codefendant (s).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]t is not necessary that ownership of the property be laid in a particular person in order to allege and prove armed robbery. The gist of the offense of robbery is the taking by force or putting in fear. An indictment for robbery will not fail if the description of the property is sufficient to show it to be the subject of robbery and negates the idea that the accused was taking his own property. [Citations omitted.]”
    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.