State v. Joyner’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2012
6 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 Dykes v. Hamilton County · Harrell v. State · Young v. State
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whoever knowingly, directly or indirectly, accesses, causes to be accessed, or attempts to access any telephone system, telecommunications facility, computer software, computer program, data, computer, computer system, computer network, or any part thereof, for the purpose of: ... . Obtaining money, property, or services for oneself or another by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises violates this subsection and is subject to the penalties [listed].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Newberger v. State“accounts on the back of the check. When the bank returned the check as uncollectible, it would then be charged back against the”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Newberger v. State
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.