Chalin v. State’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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Ex post facto considerations come into play when legislation or judicial action detrimentally affects a person and the legislation or judicial action relates to acts of that person committed before the legislation came into force or before the judicial action occurred. Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24 , 101 S.Ct. 960 , 67 L.Ed.2d 17 (1981). These considerations affect only substantive, not procedural, matters. Dobbert v. Florida, 432 U.S. 282 , 97 S.Ct. 2290 , 53 L.Ed.2d 344 (1977). In other words, legislation and judicial action may not retroactively subject a person’s action to criminal prosecution, see Bouie v. Columbia, supra, and may not retroactively subject criminal actions to a potentially more onerous punishment, see Weaver v. Graham, supra, but may change the procedures by which it is determined whether a person has committed act, or what punishment is appropriate, see Dobbert v. Florida, supra.”

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

2. “"Sec. 3.06. If a general provision conflicts with a special or local provision, they shall be construed, if possible, so that effect is given to both. If the conflict between the provisions is irreconcilable, the special or local provision prevails as an exception to the general provision, unless the general provision is the later enactment and the manifest intent is that the general provision prevail."”

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