State v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently December 2007 · most notably State v. White (1981), State v. Woods (1982)
33 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 Barrett v. United States · Idaho ex rel. Evans v. Oregon · State v. Franco · State v. Holt · State v. Castaldi
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“INSTRUCTION NO. 7 A person is responsible for his own conduct and he is also responsible for the conduct of other persons in committing an offense if he acts with them with the common purpose of committing that offense, or if, for the purpose of committing that offense, he aids or encourages the other persons in committing it. If you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about June 29, 1983, in the County of Shelby, State of Missouri, the defendant, or others, disposed of four (4) pregnant sows, and Second, that the property was that of another and had been stolen, and Third, that at the time defendant, or others, disposed of this property, the defendant knew or believed it had been stolen, and Fourth, that the defendant, or others, disposed of the property for the purpose of using or disposing of it in such a way that made recovery by the owner unlikely, and Fifth, that the property had a combined value of at least One Hundred Fifty Dollars, then you are instructed that the offense of receiving stolen property has occurred, and if you further find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: Sixth, that with the purpose of promoting or furthering the commission of receiving stolen property, the defendant aided or encouraged other persons in committing that offense, then you will find the defendant guilty of receiving stolen property. However, if you do not find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sparks““Participation may be inferred and the evidence need not directly reflect the accused in the act of committing the crime with which he is charged_ Such inference may be drawn from the presence of the accused, conduct before and after the offense, and companionship before and after the offense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Phillips
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.