Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 659 SW2D 201 - Hamilton v. Commonwealth

Hamilton v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
November 2012
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2012

12 state decisions

601983199020002010decided

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

Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Brown v. Ohio · Ex Parte Nielsen · Harris v. Oklahoma · Burdue v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “When we view the present case, we find that the proof utilized to convict the appellant of rape was that he had sexual intercourse with a ten-year-old child, who was, in actuality, his daughter. The only additional fact — the relationship of father/daughter — was required in the incest charge. Thus, in a sense, the additional fact was not present in “each” case, as required by Blockburger , but in only one case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction 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....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.