Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 145 SW3D 881 - State v. Polson

State v. Polson’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Benton v. Maryland · State v. Grim · State v. Dulany · State v. Tokar

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

  1. ““Under the double jeopardy doctrine, the state cannot split a single crime and prosecute it in separate parts; otherwise the state could prosecute a defendant as many times as there are parts into which an offense is susceptible of being divided. This means that a prosecution for any single part of a crime bars any further prosecution based upon the whole or another part of that crime. Double jeopardy forbids the state from a piecemeal prosecution of an offense.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “1. It is unlawful for any person to possess chemicals listed in subsection 2 of section 195.400, or reagents, or solvents, or any other chemicals proven to be precursor ingredients of methamphetamine or amphetamine, .... with the intent to manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, or otherwise alter that chemical to create a controlled substance or a controlled substance analogue in violation of sections 195.005 to 195.425.”
    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.