McLennan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A “continuing offense” is one that is a “continuous act or series of acts set on foot by a single impulse and operated by an unintermittent force.” Britt v. State, 261 Ark. 488 , 549 S.W.2d 84 (1977). The test to determine if a situation involves a continuing offense is “whether the individual acts are prohibited, or the course of action which they constitute; if the former, then each act is punishable separately; if the latter, there can be but one penalty.” Id., 261 Ark. at 493 , quoting Wharton, Criminal Law, 11th ed. § 34, n. 3. Put another way, “when the impulse is single, but one indictment lies, no matter how long the action may continue. If successive impulses are separately given, even though all unite in swelling a common stream of action, separate indictments lie.” Id. Examples given in Britt and cited in several subsequent cases of continuing offenses include nonsupport [ Ark. Code Ann. § 5-26-401 ], promoting prostitution [Ark.. Code Ann. §§ 5-70-104 - 106], and erecting or maintaining a gate across a public highway [ Ark. Code Ann. § 5-71-214 ],”

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

2. “Each of appellant's shots required a separate conscious act or impulse in pulling the trigger and is accordingly punishable as a separate offense.”

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