Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"When multiple offenses are prosecuted in one trial, the Double Jeopardy Clause 'prevent[s] the sentencing court from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended.' Missouri v. Hunter , 459 U.S. 359 , 366, 103 S.Ct. 673 , 74 L.Ed.2d 535 (1983). A defendant suffers multiple punishments in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause when he is convicted of more offenses than the legislature intended. Ball v. United States , 470 U.S. 856 , 105 S.Ct. 1668 , 84 L.Ed.2d 740 (1985). In Missouri v. Hunter , the Court noted that '[t]he opinion in Blockburger[ v. United States , 284 U.S. 299 (1932) ] stated: "The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not." 284 U.S. at 304 .' 459 U.S. at 366 . However, the Court further stated ' "[t]he Blockburger test is a 'rule of statutory construction,' and because it serves as a means of discerning congressional purpose the rule should not be controlling where, for example, there is a clear indication of contrary legislative intent." Albernaz v. United States , supra, 450 U.S. [333] at 340 [ (1981) ] (emphasis added).' Id. "Both crimes of which Davis was convicted constitute murder under the same statute. In this case, there was one murder of one victim under one set of circumstances. The statute commences,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Miller v. State

2. “Felony murder and intentional murder may be considered as separate offenses under the Blockburger test because felony murder requires proof of a felony, which intentional murder does not, and intentional murder requires proof of intent, which felony murder does not. However, it is clear that the Legislature intended that both constitute murder, a single offense carrying a single sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Miller v. State

3. “The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Miller v. State