678 So. 2d 319 - Boler v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 58 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This test inquires whether each offense contains an element not contained in the other; if not, they are the same offense and double jeopardy bars subsequent punishment or prosecution.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Delgado v. State · 766 So. 2d 259 - Busby v. State

2. “(4)(a) ... For the purposes of this subsection, offenses are separate if each offense requires proof of an element that the other does not, without regard to the accusatory pleading or the proof adduced at trial. (b) The intent of the Legislature is to convict and sentence for each criminal offense committed in the course of one criminal episode or transaction and not to allow the principle of lenity as set forth in subsection (1) to determine legislative intent. Exceptions to this rule of construction are: 1. Offenses which require identical elements of proof. 2. Offenses which are degrees of the same offense as provided by statute. 3. Offenses which are lesser offenses the statutory elements of which are subsumed by the greater offense.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 766 So. 2d 259 - Busby v. State · 761 So. 2d 1135 - Brown v. State

3. “[T]he Double Jeopardy Clause does no more than prevent the sentencing court from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 712 So. 2d 380 - Johnson v. State · 680 So. 2d 1067 - Green v. State