Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 435 P2D 424 - Payne v. State

Payne v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
5
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 2019 · most notably State v. DiRienzo (1969), United States v. Jones (1969)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

160196719701980199020002010decided

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 Tot v. United States · United States v. Gainey · United States v. Romano · Carter v. State · Davie v. State

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

  1. “... there is no reasonable connection between possession (the fact proved) and knowledge that the goods were stolen (the fact presumed), in the absence of some evidence to the contrary, and therefore such presumption is arbitrary.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[such persons] shall be presumed to have bought or received such property knowing it to have been so stolen or wrongfully obtained. This presumption may, however, be rebutted by proof.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[s]uch a legislative determination [ i.e., a presumption of guilt] would not be sustained if there was `no rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed.'”
    2 later decisions 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.