State v. Hogie’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably State v. Rambousek (1992), 153 Wis. 2d 477 - State Ex Rel. Collins v. American Family Mutual Insurance (1990)
29 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2312
Relies on United States v. Scott · United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co. · Sanabria v. United States · Lee v. United States · State v. Howe
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Theft of property. A person is guilty of theft if he: "1. Knowingly takes or exercises unauthorized control over, or makes an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, the property of another with intent to deprive the owner thereof; "2. Knowingly obtains the property of another by deception or by threat with intent to deprive the owner thereof, or intentionally deprives another of his property by deception or by threat; or "3. Knowingly receives, retains, or disposes of property of another which has been stolen, with intent to deprive the owner thereof.” N.D.C.C. § 12.1-23-05(2), states: "Grading of theft offenses. “2. Theft under this chapter is a class C felony if: "a. The property or services stolen exceed five hundred dollars in value; ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ensz“1. An order quashing an information or indictment or any count thereof. 2. An order granting a new trial. 3. An order arresting judgment. 4. An order made after judgment affecting any substantial right of the state. 5. An order granting the return of property or suppressing evidence, or suppressing a confession or admission, when accompanied by a statement of the prosecuting attorney asserting that the appeal is not taken for purpose of delay and that the evidence is a substantial proof of a fact material in the proceeding. The statement must be filed with the clerk of district court and a copy must accompany the notice of appeal. [N.D.C.C. § 29-28-07.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Meyer““An oral denial does not constitute an order denying the motion. An order must be in writing. It must be signed by the judge. And the motion is pending until such time as a signed written order granting or denying it is made.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gwyther
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.