Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 198 CONN 111 - State v. Rawls

State v. Rawls’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

137
cited by 137 later decisions
4
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

137 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably State v. Hinton (1993), State v. Courchesne (2003)

137 state decisions

47019851990200020102020decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green · Brown v. Ohio · Missouri v. Hunter

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

  1. “Although the Connecticut constitution contains no specific double jeopardy provision, “ ‘the due process guarantees of article first, § 8, have been held to include such a protection.’ ” State v. Van Sant, 198 Conn. 369 , 375 n.5, 503 A.2d 557 (1986), quoting State v. Rawls, 198 Conn. 111 , 113 n.3, 502 A.2d 374 (1985).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The proper double jeopardy inquiry when a defendant is convicted of multiple violations of the same statutory provision is whether the legislature intended to punish the individual acts separately or to punish only the course of action which they constitute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The issue, though essentially constitutional, becomes one of statutory construction.”
    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.