Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 281 N.C. 564 - State v. Lewis

State v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
1
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably State v. Wilson (1985), State v. Maines (1981)

49 state decisions

21019721980199020002010decided

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. Foster · State v. Palmer · State v. Pinyatello · State v. . Hunt · State v. Allison

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

  1. “When it is established that a store or warehouse has been broken into and entered and that merchandise has been stolen therefrom, the discovery, soon after such theft of articles, so stolen, in the possession of the defendant raises a presumption that he is guilty both of the breaking and entering and of the larceny. [Emphasis added.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is the general rule in this State that one found in the unexplained possession of recently stolen property is presumed to be the thief. This is a factual presumption and is strong or weak depending on circumstances — the time between the theft and the possession, the type of property involved, and its legitimate availability in the community.” State v. Raynes, 272 N.C. 488 , 158 S.E. 2d 351 ; State v. Allison, 265 N.C. 512 , 144 S.E. 2d 578 ; Strong, N.C. Index, 2d, Larceny, § 5. To give rise to this presumption, it is not necessary that the stolen property be found actually in the hands of or on the person of the accused, it being sufficient if it was found in a container or place of deposit under his exclusive personal control.”
    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.