Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 SW3D 270 - Saenz v. State

Saenz v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Alabama v. Smith · Ball v. United States · Sanabria v. United States · Ervin v. State

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

  1. “It is Congress, and not the prosecution, which establishes and defines offenses. Few, if any, limitations are imposed by the Double Jeopardy Clause on the legislative power to define offenses. But once Congress has defined a statutory offense by its prescription of the “allowable unit of prosecution,” that prescription determines the scope of protection afforded by a prior conviction or acquittal. Whether a particular course of conduct involves one or more distinct “offenses” under the statute depends on this congressional choice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.