Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 260 Kan. 881 - State v. Harlin

State v. Harlin’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
4
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently November 2018

12 state decisions

100199620002010decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · United States v. Halper · United States v. Ursery · Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth Ranch · Simuel 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution provides three different types of protection for a person charged with a crime. Double jeopardy protection shields an accused from: (1) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (3) multiple punishments for the same offense.” 260 Kan. 881 , Syl. ¶ 2.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the regulations which govern prison disciplinary procedures herein and the actual discipline imposed clearly do not constitute a basis for the application of Halper and a determination that the prison discipline imposed rises to the level of punishment or multiple prosecution for double jeopardy purposes.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Disciplinary rules and procedures are necessary for the control of dangerous and desperate individuals unwillingly confined in such institutions, in order to protect employees, inmates, and visitors, as well as the physical structure itself.”
    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.