4 Neb. Ct. App. 192 - State v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 2022
8 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 Riverbend Farms, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board · Bowsher v. SmithKline Corp. · Walker v. City of Birmingham · Bartell v. United States · United States v. Murray
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the state is to enjoy a more flexible due process analysis in a child viciim/witness case [in pleading the charge in the information], it should also endure a rigid double jeopardy analysis if a later prosecution based upon the same transaction during the same time frame is charged. ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We do not believe that State v. Piskorski, 218 Neb. 543 , 357 N.W.2d 206 (1984), supports the ... proposition which our respected colleagues set forth in State v. Quick, [ 1 Neb.App. 756 , 511 N.W.2d 168 (1993) ],”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“courts may tailor double jeopardy protection to reflect the time period involved in the charge in the earlier prosecution.”
1 later decision 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.