Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 714 P2D 919 - People v. Tinkle

People v. Tinkle’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 2025

5 state decisions

2019851990200020102020decided

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. Bennett · People v. Treat · 42 Colo. App. 209 - People v. American Health Care, Inc. · Davis v. People · 37 Colo. App. 71 - People v. Martinez

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

  1. “The critical elements here are defendant's intent to deprive and the location where his control over (victims) merchandise was no longer authorized. Even with the evidence considered in the light most favorable to the prosecution, all inferences point to defendant exercising authorized control in Colorado, and not formulating any wrongful intent until he was out of this State. (Cites omitted.) Under these circumstances, jurisdiction for prosecution of the theft charge was not established, and defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. (Emphasis added.)”
    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.