Thompson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2009
12 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 Crowell v. State · Sanford v. State · Manning v. State · Sartorious v. State · Goldman 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a person ... receives in any manner ... personal property of any value, feloniously taken away from another, knowing the same to have been so taken, he shall be guilty of receiving stolen goods.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Perhaps the clearest pronouncement of this Court as to the requirements of proof needed to secure a conviction for violation of § 97-17-69 appears in Johnson v. State, 247 So.2d 697 (Miss.1971). We therefore quote extensively from that opinion: In Sanford v. State, 155 Miss. 295 , 124 So. 353 (1929), we stated: The unexplained possession of stolen property shortly after the commission of a larceny is a circumstance from which guilt of the larceny may be inferred, but no inference can be drawn therefrom alone that the one in possession of the property received it from another knowing that it had been stolen. Sartorious v. State, 24 Miss. 602 ; Manning v. State, 129 Miss. 179 , 91 So. 902 . (155 Miss, at 297, 124 So. at 353 ). Again, in Crowell v. State, 195 Miss. 427 , 15 So.2d 508 (1943), we stated: * * * One guilty of larceny or burglary necessarily knows the facts and circumstances connected with the crime, but in a prosecution for receiving stolen property, guilty knowledge is the very gist of the offense. Such knowledge must be both alleged and proved. * * * (195 Miss, at 436, 15 So.2d at 511 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“gist of the offense of receiving stolen property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lewis v. State
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.