State v. Alingog’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently March 2014
16 state decisions
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 Singleton v. Wulff · Brown v. Ohio · Hormel v. Helvering · United States v. Wilson · Ohio v. Johnson
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rules of practice and procedure are devised to promote the ends of justice, not to defeat them.... Orderly rules of procedure do not require sacrifice of the rules of fundamental justice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Alingog“the State's willingness to accept a plea to a lesser charge has [no] bearing on the State's entitlement to seek a determination of guilt or innocence on the more serious charge.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Alingog“part of the purpose of the double jeopardy clause is to prevent the State `with all its resources and power' from harassing individuals.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Alingog
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.