Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 CONN 74 - State v. Lonergan

State v. Lonergan’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

122
cited by 122 later decisions
2
states following
June 2013
most recently cited

122 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably State v. Chicano (1990), State v. Garvin (1997)

122 state decisions

8301989199020002010decided

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 Blockburger v. United States · North Carolina v. Pearce · Ashe v. Swenson · Benton v. Maryland · Brown v. Ohio

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

  1. “The underlying idea, one that is deeply ingrained in at least the Anglo-American system of jurisprudence, is that the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[I]f the same evidence offered to prove a violation of the offense charged in the first prosecution is the sole evidence offered to prove an element of the offense charged in the second prosecution, then prosecution of the second offense is barred on double jeopardy grounds, regardless of whether either offense requires proof of a fact that the other does not.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “`It protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal. [2] It protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction. [3] And it protects against multiple punishments for the same offense [in a single trial].”
    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.