642 So. 2d 41 - State v. McNab’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
July 2004
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bartkus v. People of State of Illinois · Heath v. Alabama · Strobhar v. State · 560 So. 2d 1231 - Davis v. State · State v. Cantrell
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a defendant in a single act violates the peace and dignity of two sovereigns by breaking the laws of each, he has committed two distinct offenses for double jeopardy purposes. Since the states are separate sovereigns and equal to each other in power, dignity, and authority, each has the power independently to determine what is an offense against its authority and to punish such offenses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“on the basis that McNab had committed only one theft and thus there could only be one prosecution by one state, even if the crime crossed state lines.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Chipman v. State
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.