Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 Ariz. 492 - State v. Mitchell

State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
4
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably State v. Tinghitella (1971), State v. Woods (1984)

2 federal appellate · 72 state decisions

620197019801990200020102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · State v. Westbrook · State v. Hutton · State v. Jacobs · State v. Prewitt

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

  1. ““An act or omission which is made punishable in different ways by different sections of the laws may be punished under either, but in no event under more than one. An acquittal or conviction and sentence under either one bars a prosecution for the same act or omission under any other.””
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The practical test is to eliminate the elements in one charge and determine whether the facts left would support the other charge.””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The elements constituting robbery and grand theft — auto, are not entirely different, nor may robbery occur without the taking of personal property. We therefore hold that the grand theft auto conviction and sentence cannot stand. In view of the fact that the sentences imposed are concurrent, it is ordered that the judgment and conviction for grand theft — auto, is vacated and the sentence set aside. No further action is required of the trial court.” 104 Ariz. at 361, 453 P.2d at 507 .”
    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.