Reader v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently January 2019
2 federal appellate · 14 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 Brown v. United States · State v. Norris · State v. Shahan · State v. Carr
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here property belonging to different owners is taken at the same time and place as a single or continuous act or transaction, that taking constitutes a single criminal offense [of theft] ....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Mills v. State · Parker v. State“§ 857. Theft and related offenses; definitions For purposes of §§ 841-856, 1450 and 1451 of this title: (7) “Property of another person” includes property in which any person other than the defendant has an interest which the defendant is not privileged to infringe, regardless of the fact that the defendant also has an interest in the property and regardless of the fact that the other person might be precluded from civil recovery because the property was used in an unlawful transaction or was subject to forfeiture as contraband. Property in possession of the actor shall not be deemed property of another who has only a security interest therein, even if legal title is in the creditor pursuant to a conditional sales contract or other security agreement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brooke““[t]he matter of ownership does not characterize the crime. Neither the legal nor moral phase of the offense is affected by the fact that portions of property taken may have belonged to different persons, and there is no ground, on the one hand, for allowing the state to split up the single act of the accused into subjects for several prosecutions, nor, on the other hand, for denying it the right to prosecute for the entire transaction as a single offense, aggravated by increased value of all the property stolen.””
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.