State v. Felder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Double jeopardy prohibits not only multiple trials for the same offense, but also multiple punishments for the same offense.... The double jeopardy analysis in the context of a single trial is a two part process. First, the charges must arise out of the same act or transaction. Second, it must be determined whether the charged crimes are the same offense. Multiple punishments are forbidden only if both conditions are met.... The defendant on appeal bears the burden of proving that the prosecutions are for the same offense in law and fact.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 Conn. App. 530 - State v. Carlos P.

2. “The traditional approach to analyzing whether two offenses constitute the same offense was set forth in Blockburger v. United States , 284 U.S. 299 , 52 S.Ct. 180 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). [W]here 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 a fact which the other does not.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 Conn. App. 530 - State v. Carlos P.

3. “This test is a technical one and examines only the statutes, charging instruments, and bill of particulars as opposed to the evidence presented at trial.... Thus, the issue, though essentially constitutional, becomes one of statutory construction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 Conn. App. 530 - State v. Carlos P.