State v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The code definition of included offense enacts, in paraphrase, the Blockburger [ Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 , l.c. 304, 52 S.Ct. 180, 182 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932) ] test that where the same conduct constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, `the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not,'—if so, there is no identity of offense. State v. McCrary, 621 S.W.2d 266 (Mo. banc 1981); State v. Chambers, 524 S.W.2d 826, 829 [1, 2] (Mo. banc 1975).”

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

2. “Amounts stolen pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct whether from the same or several owners and whether at the same or different times, constitute a single criminal episode and may be aggregated in determining the grade of the offense.”

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