Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 727 P2D 859 - People v. Pedrie

People v. Pedrie’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2019

16 state decisions

601986199020002010decided

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 Maestas v. District Court · People v. Treat · Hunter v. District Ct. in & for Twentieth Jud. Dist. · Kelley v. People · People v. Becker

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

  1. “Theft. (1) A person commits theft when he knowingly obtains or exercises control over anything of value of another without authorization, or by threat or deception, and: (a) Intends to deprive the other person permanently of the use or benefit of the thing of value; or (b) Knowingly uses, conceals, or abandons the thing of value in such manner as to deprive the other person permanently of its use or benefit; or (c) Uses, conceals, or abandons the thing of value intending that such use, concealment, or abandonment will deprive the other person permanently of its use and benefit; or (d) Demands any consideration to which he is not legally entitled as a condition of restoring the thing of value to the other person.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Intent to deprive another permanently of the use or benefit of a thing of value may be inferred from the defendant's conduct and the cireumstances of the case. Such an intent is sufficiently established if the prosecution proves a knowing use by the defendant inconsistent with the owner's permanent use and benefit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “proves a knowing use by the defendant inconsistent with the owner's permanent use and benefit”
    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.