Prodan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Evidence that the defendant had the personal, unexplained possession of property recently stolen is sufficient to raise a presumption or inference of guilt and to sustain his conviction for theft of that property. See, e.g., Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837 , 93 S.Ct. 2357 , 37 L.Ed.2d 380 (1973); Sirabella v. State, 492 S.W.2d 571 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Smith v. State, 518 S.W.2d 823 (Tex.Cr.App.1975). However, evidence that a defendant had the personal possession of property recently stolen is not sufficient to sustain his conviction for theft of that property if when he was first directly or circumstantially called upon to explain his possession of the property he made a reasonable explanation which is not refuted, showing his honest acquisition of the property. Smith v. State, supra.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Musgrave v. State · Penn v. State

2. “"A person commits an offense [credit card abuse] if ... he steals a credit card or, with knowledge that it has been stolen, receives a credit card with intent to use it, to sell it, or to transfer it to a person other than the issuer or the cardholder ...."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Clark

3. “"did then and there unlawfully and knowingly steal a BankAmericard credit card owned by Jeanne O'Sullivan, hereafter styled the complainant, from the possession of the complainant with the intent to deprive the complainant of the property."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Clark