70 Okla. Crim. 39 - Underhill v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 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. ““(T]he possession of recently stolen goods is a strong circumstance to be considered in a larceny prosecution; but the possession of stolen property alone, and without any additional testimony, will not sustain a charge of larceny. It may be slight and wholly circumstantial, but there must be some evidence to connect the defendant with the original asportation. . .”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Shockey v. State · Rhinehart v. State

2. ““The first requisite of larceny is taking possession of goods by the thief. Taking and carrying away being essential elements of the crime of larceny, no subsequent connection with the property stolen can make one guilty of theft who was not connected with the original taking.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 78 Okla. Crim. 258 - Cook v. State · 92 Okla. Crim. 37 - Mercer v. State

3. ““ ‘Proof of the possession of stolen property is alone not sufficient to warrant conviction, but where there is other proof supporting the inference sufficient to warrant submission of the issue to the jury, this Court will not disturb their findings thereon.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brinlee v. State