Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 14 Va. App. 203 - Walker v. Commonwealth

14 Va. App. 203 - Walker v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently August 2014

23 state decisions

140199220002010decided

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 Blockburger v. United States · Grady v. Corbin · Peretz v. United States · Milton v. Texas · Briley v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “The two indictments before us were handed down by the same grand jury on the same day and the two indictments arose out of the same incident. Under these circumstances, we find that the trial court erred in holding that these two proceedings constituted successive prosecutions. ... To hold otherwise would sanction the use by this and other defendants of the double jeopardy clause as a sword.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “neither `transform[s] the single prosecution into two separate prosecutions nor capture[s] for [the defendant] any special protections against successive prosecutions under the [D]ouble [J]eopardy [C]lause.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An offense is not a lesser included offense of another if each offense contains an element that the other does not.”
    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.