14 Va. App. 198 - Moore v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “However true that may be, it is not relevant to the test laid out in Grady . In Grady , the Supreme Court clearly stated that the conduct proved in the second prosecution must have constituted an offense for which appellant has already been prosecuted . . . In the first prosecution in the case before us, appellant was not charged with the offense of driving. Driving was merely an element of the two misdemeanors for which he was previously convicted. Under the facts of this case, in order for Grady to bar the second prosecution, the government would have needed to prove either reckless driving or eluding a police officer as conduct constituting ... an essential element of driving after having been declared an habitual offender. The mere fact that the two prosecutions involved a single, overlapping element of proof is not, in itself, enough to invoke the protections of the double jeopardy clause.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Spencer · State v. Watkins