Snowden v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 6 district · 131 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 144 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Ford v. State (1993), State v. Lancaster (1993)
5 federal appellate · 6 district · 131 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 · Bell v. United States · Gavieres v. United States · Ebeling v. Morgan · Newton v. State
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 144 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The required evidence is that which is minimally necessary to secure a conviction for each ... offense. If each offense requires proof of a fact which the other does not, or in other words, if each offense contains an element which the other does not, the offenses are not the same for double jeopardy [and merger] purposes, even though arising from the same conduct or episode. But, where only one offense requires proof of an additional fact, so that all elements of one offense are present in the other, the offenses are deemed to be the same for double jeopardy [and merger] purposes.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage““Battery, another common law offense, is the unlawful application of force to the person of another.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Robbery is a ... larceny from the person accomplished by either an assault (putting in fear) or a battery (violence)”
3 later decisions 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.