State v. Haagenson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “[A] revocation of parole or probation does not constitute a punishment for double jeopardy purposes under the Fifth Amendment and Article II, Section 25. Rather, it is a supervisory act involving the enforcement of conditions imposed on a term of parole or probation. Upon the demonstration of a probation violation, the sentencing court may modify the offender’s original sentence by replacing the term of probation with imprisonment.... This is not a “punishment”; rather it is a forfeiture of a conditional privilege previously granted by the State as a matter of grace.”

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

2. “The fact that applicant was twice placed in risk of punishment, however, does not mean that he had been subjected to double jeopardy. The double jeopardy proscription of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an accused against being twice placed in jeopardy of punishment for 'the same offence.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Doan, Ex Parte Dustin

3. “purely administrative action designed to determine whether a parolee or probationer has violated the conditions of his parole or probation, not a proceeding designed to punish a criminal defendant for a violation of a criminal law”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Doan, Ex Parte Dustin