Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 379 SO2D 1088 - State v. Doughty

State v. Doughty’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 78 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 387 So. 2d 1175 - State v. Steele (1980), 392 So. 2d 651 - State v. Knowles (1980)

2 federal appellate · 78 state decisions

2801980199020002010decided

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 · Iannelli v. United States · United States v. Wilson

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

  1. “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 different offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““... no additional fact, beyond that necessary to prove the theft charge, was required to warrant a conviction on the forgery charge.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “offenses are the same when the evidence required to support a conviction upon one would have been sufficient to warrant a conviction upon the other.”
    2 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.