State v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
206 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 208 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably State v. Fernandez (1997), State v. Churchdale Leasing, Inc. (1989)
206 state decisions
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 · Brown v. Ohio · Missouri v. Hunter · Whalen 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 208 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“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.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Swann · State v. Raines“[i]n single prosecution situations, the presumption raised by the Blockburger test is only a federal rule for determining legislative intent as to violations of federal criminal laws and is neither binding on state courts nor conclusive.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Where multiple punishment [in a single prosecution] is involved, the Double Jeopardy Clause acts as a restraint on the prosecutor and the courts, not the legislature. The Double Jeopardy Clauses of both the United States and North Carolina Constitutions prohibit a court from imposing more punishment than that intended by the legislature. “[T]he question whether punishments imposed by a court after a defendant’s conviction upon criminal charges are unconstitutionally multiple cannot be resolved without determining what punishments the Legislative Branch has authorized.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.