Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 Idaho 805 - State v. Gilbert

State v. Gilbert’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
October 2006
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 2006

11 state decisions

60198719902000decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983) · 26 U.S.C. § 63 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7203 · 42 U.S.C. § 601 (§ 401 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Bordenkircher v. Hayes · Spies v. United States · Oyler v. Boles · Wayte v. United States

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

  1. “The defense of selective prosecution is part of a web of constitutional constraints that overlie the discretionary powers accorded to prosecuting authorities. So long as the prosecutor has probable cause to believe that a suspect has committed an offense defined by statute, the decision whether to prosecute, and what charge to file, rests in the prosecutor’s discretion. Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357 , 98 S.Ct. 663 , 54 L.Ed.2d 604 (1978). Such discretion is allowed because a decision to prosecute is generally ill-suited to judicial review. Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598 , 105 S.Ct. 1524 , 84 L.Ed.2d 547 (1985). Nevertheless, the Supreme Court in Wayte has recognized a defense of selective prosecution and has outlined its substantive elements. A defendant bears the burden of establishing (1) that he was singled out for prosecution and (2) that the decision to prosecute him, rather than other persons, was based upon an impermissible factor such as race, religion or the exercise of a constitutional right. Id. [Citations omitted.] The defense may be established by showing that the state selected the defendant from a larger group of non-prosecuted alleged violators because of his exercise of a constitutional right. [Citation omitted.] However, incomplete enforcement of the laws, standing alone, does not offend the federal or state constitution. [Citations omitted.]”
    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.