Parnell v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant had stolen a motor “vehicle” even though the car “had no transmission or radiator”
• evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant had sto- len a motor “vehicle” even though the car “had no trans- mission or radiator”
• evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant had stolen a motor “vehicle” even though the car “had no transmission or radiator”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. McGary
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1984-06-18· cited 58×
• State v. Eastep
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2017-08-10· cited 22×
• United States v. Bibbins
  Ninth Circuit· 2011-04-20· cited 18×
• Asay v. Watkins
  Utah Supreme Court· 1988-03-11· cited 14×
• Ingram v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1981-11-05· cited 11×
• State v. Blevins
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1981-02-03· cited 6×
• Conley v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2006-09-22· cited 5×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Ridinger
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1954-03-08· cited 33×
• MacK v. Ricketts
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1976-01-06· cited 13×