Devore v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 1995
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Alaska · White v. Illinois · White v. Illinois · Baxter v. State · Coker v. State
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) The state may seek to have a person sentenced as an habitual substance offender for any substance by alleging, on a page separate from the rest of the charging instrument, that the person has accumulated two (2) prior unrelated substance offense convictions. (c) After a person has been convicted and sentenced for a substance offense committed after sentencing for a prior unrelated substance offense conviction, the person has accumulated two (2) prior unrelated substance offense convictions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roell v. State“1. Whether the trial court erred in enhancing Devore's punishment under both the OWI statute and the habitual substance offender statute; 2. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's judgment that Devore was a habitual substance offender; 3. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support Devore's conviction for OWI; and, 4. Whether Devore's sentence enhancements placed him twice in jeopardy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Devore 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.