Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 Ga. 336 - Anthony v. Hopper

Anthony v. Hopper’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Spencer v. Kemp (1986), State v. Wade (2010)

3 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

7019751980199020002010decided

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 State v. Estevez · Zilinmon v. State · 126 Ga. App. 130 - Carlson v. Johnson · Williams v. Ricketts · Johnson v. Caldwell

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

  1. “There is no absolute constitutional bar to imposing a more severe sentence upon resentencing, but vindictiveness must not be the motivating force behind the increased sentence. North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U. S. 711 (89 SC 2072, 23 LE2d 656) [(1969)]. Pearce set forth standards for determining the constitutionality of the imposition of a more severe penalty upon resentencing by the court after reconviction following a successful appeal. Pearce requires that the court must include in the record an affirmative statement of the reasons underlying the decision to increase the punishment upon resentencing. Those reasons should in fact support the imposition of the harsher penalty.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]here is no absolute constitutional bar to imposing a more severe sentence upon resentencing, but vindictiveness must not be the motivating force behind the increased sentence.”
    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.