203 Mich. App. 294 - People v. Doyle’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he due process provisions of the United States Constitution and the Michigan Constitution bar the retroactive application of judicial decisions that have the effect of enhancing the possible penalty for a criminal conviction.... Among other things, a court cannot by judicial construction increase the authorized penalty for a crime after the fact... Because that is precisely what the application of Bewersdorf to this case would do, that case cannot be applied to this one. [Doyle, supra at 296, 512 N.W.2d 59 .]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v Doyle

2. “he could expect that should his case reach the Court of Appeals, the panel that would consider his case might disagree with the Tucker/ Bewersdorf ruling, and he would be bound by any contrary ruling....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v Doyle

3. “[b]ecause `[a] new decision that explicitly overrules an earlier holding obviously”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v Doyle