Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 52 F.3d 178 - Jacob v. Clarke

Jacob v. Clarke’s Empirical Analysis

52 F.3d 178 · 1995

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
5
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently October 2015

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions

110199520002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Burks v. United States · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Oregon v. Kennedy · United States v. DiFrancesco · Lockhart v. Nelson

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

  1. “[Defendant’s] position is that the Double Jeopardy Clause should bar retrial whenever a reversal [ (or in our case granting a motion for a new trial) ] can later be attributed to “prosecutorial misconduct,” indeed, whenever a defendant can prove prosecutorial misconduct after a conviction was reversed for any reason. We reject that contention, which has no support in any prior double jeopardy decision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “But the Court's latest signal is decidedly more ambiguous. In Lockhart , an appellate reversal case decided in the prosecution's favor, the Court introduced its double jeopardy analysis by stating that the record revealed no prosecutorial misconduct. Such a pointed caveat suggests that this remains an open issue.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “must prove intentional prosecutorial misconduct”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.