State v. Cornish

How courts have described this case

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

• finding joyriding to be a lesser included offense of auto theft after concluding that the phrase \without intent to steal\ in the theft statute is not an element for the state to prove
• finding joyriding to be a lesser included offense of auto theft after concluding that the phrase “without intent to steal” in the theft statute is not an element for the state to prove

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Crick
  Utah Supreme Court· 1983-11-09· cited 49×
• State v. Kamai
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1995-11-30· cited 19×
• In re Lakeysha P.
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1995-09-28· cited 18×
• State v. Carruth
  Utah Supreme Court· 1999-12-10· cited 7×
• State v. Carruth
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 1997-10-23· cited 6×
• State v. Noren
  Utah Supreme Court· 1980-11-19· cited 6×
• State v. Lloyd
  Utah Supreme Court· 1977-08-10· cited 4×
• State v. Tucker
  Utah Supreme Court· 1980-09-23· cited 4×
• State v. Cox
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 1988-03-23· cited 4×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Marshall
  California Supreme Court· 1957-04-19· cited 200×
• State v. Eyle
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1963-12-24· cited 24×
• Spencer v. State
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 1973-11-19· cited 17×
• State v. Shults
  Montana Supreme Court· 1976-01-07· cited 10×
• State v. Ash
  Utah Supreme Court· 1969-06-30· cited 8×