279 N.J. Super. 123 - State v. Pindale’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
February 2003
most recently cited
2 district · 8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Williams v. People of State of New York · Bibby v. United States · Alabama v. Smith · Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Due process of law ... requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial. And since the fear of such vindictiveness may unconstitutionally deter a defendant’s exercise of the right to appeal or collaterally attack his first conviction, due process also requires a defendant be freed of apprehension of such a retaliatory motivation on the part of the sentencing judge.”
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.