State v. Fugate’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

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.

1. “The State had nothing to lose by filing 'great-bodily-injury' charges in district court at the time of the accident upon the facts ... known [at the time Mr. Fugate was charged in municipal court]. Under those circumstances, no reliance on the 'necessary facts' exception of Diaz, upon which rests excuse from filing the death-by-vehicle charges at the time, would have been required. Sufficient facts already were known to permit the filing of the alternative offense of great-bodily-injury-by-vehicle under the same statute; that charge would have borne the same felony conviction and the same felony penalty as would conviction of the alternative statutory offense of death-by-vehicle.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mitchell v. Cody

2. “there was no absence of 'necessary facts' which would have preserved the charge of death-by-vehicle from the prohibition of double jeopardy.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mitchell v. Cody

3. “condemns both death-by-vehicle and great-bodily-injury-by-vehicle, and imposes the same penalty for either violation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mitchell v. Cody