Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 Wyo. 283 - State v. Chambers

State v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
November 1981
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 1981

20 state decisions

801952196019701980decided

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 People v. Gerold · State v. Hickenbottom · Zarzana v. Neve Drug Co. · Gardner v. State · State v. Catellier

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

  1. “When the indictment charges an offense against the property of another by larceny, embezzlement or obtaining under false pretenses, the jury, on conviction, shall ascertain and declare in their verdict the value of the property stolen, embezzled or falsely obtained.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"* * * After all of these years it hardly behooves us to do what successive sessions of legislatures have failed to do, repeal Section 10-1402 [§ 7-11-502, W.S. 1977], by a judicial decree. It has stood all of these years without change. If we had the power of legislation, we might change this statute; but we do not possess that function. It is impossible for us to say that this statute is unreasonable. We can only consider legislation as it exists. Courts are not authorized to substitute their views for those of the legislature. One of the chief merits of this great American Republic is the division of powers, in both the state and national governments, into three grand departments, the executive, the legislative and the judicial. It is essential to the success of this form of government that the powers invested in any one of these departments shall not be permitted to encroach upon the powers of any one of the others. As stated by this court in White v. Hinton, 3 Wyo. 760 , 30 P. 953 , `whether legislation is wise or unwise, politic or impolitic, is not a judicial question.' Again, `* * * the courts will not conjure up theories to overturn and overthrow the solemn declarations of the legislative body.' State ex rel. Voiles v. High School, 43 Wyo. 504 , 5 P.2d 255 ; State v. W.S. Buck Merc. Co., 38 Wyo. 47 , 264 P. 1023 , 57 A.L.R. 675 ; Brown v. Clark, 47 Wyo. 216 , 34 P.2d 17 ." at 70 Wyo. 292 , 249 P.2d 158 . (Emphasis added.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““ * * * Even in larceny cases the weight of authority, in those jurisdictions where they are not required by statute to find the value of the property stolen in their verdict, is that it is not required. A verdict of guilty, as is charged in the information, is a sufficient finding that the alleged value of the property is large enough to render the accused guilty of the degree of larceny for which he is indicted. * * * ****** “In case the question of the value of the property is a close question, the defendant should request an instruction as to value and a finding by the jury of the value of the property. It would undoubtedly be error, where properly requested to do so, for the jury not to find the value of the property in their verdict. [Citation.]””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.