State v. Cornish’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. “Any person who drives a vehicle, not his own, without the consent of the owner thereof and with intent temporarily to deprive said owner of his possession of such vehicle, without intent to steal the same is guilty of a misdemeanor ...”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Carruth · In re Lakeysha P.

2. ““A person commits theft if he obtains or exercises unauthorized control over the property of another with a purpose to deprive him thereof.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Carruth · State v. Chesnut

3. “Initially, this Court must determine whether “joyriding” is a lesser included offense of larceny. This issue is one of first impression to Tennessee ... Section 59-504 [Tenn.Code Ann.], describes the offense commonly referred to as “joyriding.” The statute is designed to condemn the acts of a person who takes another’s vehicle unlawfully, but without the intent to deprive the owner of its use permanently. However, the taking of a vehicle with the intent to steal or permanently deprive the owner of its use is prohibited, and is larceny. From a careful examination of the elements of both crimes, it is clear that the only difference in the two is that in “joyriding” there is not the element of intent to steal. Thus, we hold that the “joyriding” statute stands as an included offense of larceny.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Lakeysha P.