Bilderback v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In addition to the same-elements test, this Court has also considered a merger doe- trine that allows for the consideration of other factors: The question of merger as a bar to multiple sentences for the same act, however, summons a more complex appellate standard of review. As a practical matter, in appeals alleging imposition of multiple sentences for a single act, the focus necessarily expands to embrace those facts proven at trial. The ultimate question - becomes whether those facts reveal a single eriminal act or multiple and distinct offenses against the victim or victims and hence the State.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ivan Lee Sweets, Sr. v. The State of Wyoming · Najera v. State

2. “[in deciding merger questions, we foeus not only on the similarity of the elements of the crimes, but also, and primarily, on the facts proved at trial, for the question is whether those facts show that in practical effect the defendant committed but a single criminal act.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ivan Lee Sweets, Sr. v. The State of Wyoming · Jaime Solis v. The State of Wyoming

3. “[Where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lee v. State · Sincock v. State