State v. Robertson’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
21 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2256 · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Bailey v. United States · Brown v. Ohio · Green v. United States · Bousley v. United States
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.
“The Double Jeopardy Clause embodies three separate protections: (1) protection against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) protection against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (3) protection against multiple punishments for the same offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The second factor we consider in deciding whether to overrule a prior interpretation of a statute is 'the degree to which that interpretation has worked itself into the state of the law.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“this means we consider whether the prior interpretation is '[ ]reasonable given the statutory framework in existence at that time.'”
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.