State v. Condo’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “46-11-503 Prosecution based on same transaction barred by former prosecution. (1) When two or more offenses are known to the prosecutor, are supported by probable cause, and are consummated prior to the original charge and jurisdiction and venue of the offenses lie in a single court, a prosecution is barred if: (a) the former prosecution resulted in an acquittal. There is an acquittal whenever the prosecution results in a finding of not guilty by the trier of fact or in a determination that there is ** insufficient evidence to warrant a conviction. A finding of guilty of a lesser included offense that is subsequently set aside is an acquittal of the greater offense that was charged. (b) the former prosecution resulted in a conviction that has not been set aside, reversed, or vacated; (c) after a charge had been filed, the prosecution was terminated by a final order or judgment for the defendant that has not been set aside, reversed, or vacated; or (d) the former prosecution was terminated for reasons not amounting to an acquittal and takes place: (i) in a jury trial, when the jury is impaneled and sworn; or (ii) in a nonjury trial, after the first witness is sworn but before a judgment as to guilt or innocence is reached. (2) A prosecution based upon the same transaction as a former prosecution is not barred under subsection (1)(d) when: (a) the defendant consents to the termination or waives the right to object to the termination; or (b) the trial court finds that the termin”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Helena v. O'Connell

2. “Further, the State argues that we should simply not address Condo's claims under Article II, Section 25 because Condo has failed to properly support his argument with any relevant authority or legal analysis.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Child

3. “conduct consisting of a series of acts or omissions that are motivated by . . . a purpose to accomplish a criminal objective and that are necessary or incidental to the accomplishment of that objective”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Kopp