State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Double jeopardy exists in a second trial only when the charge in that trial is: (1) Identical with or a different grade of the same offense for which the defendant was in jeopardy in the first trial, whether or not a responsive verdict could have been rendered in the first trial as to the charge in the second trial; or (2) Based on a part of a continuous offense for which offense the defendant was in jeopardy in the first trial." Both the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, § 15 of the Louisiana Constitution guarantee that no person shall be twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense. The purpose of these provisions is to protect a person from a second prosecution after he has already been acquitted or convicted of that offense and also to protect an accused against multiple punishment for the same conduct. North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 , 89 S.Ct. 2072 , 23 L.Ed.2d 656 (1969); State v. Vaughn, 431 So.2d 763 (La.1983). Louisiana uses both the "Blockburger test" and the "same evidence test" in determining whether double jeopardy exists. La.C.Cr.P. art. 596; State v. Vaughn, supra, and cases cited therein. The " Blockburger test" was set out by the United States Supreme Court in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 , 52 S.Ct. 180 , 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932), where the court stated: "... 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 det”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jones · 734 So. 2d 854 - State v. Texada

2. “In the case of [Morris], the defendant was convicted of three felonies—simple burglary, unauthorized use of a movable, and simple criminal damage to property—all arising from his actions of entering a car dealer’s lot, kicking out the rear window of a truck, entering the truck to “hot wire” it, and driving away with the truck. The defendant’s actions took a few minutes, but he was convicted of the three different crimes committed during his continuous course of conduct.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 207 So. 3d 589 - State v. Fontenot

3. “The Louisiana Supreme Court does not allow the courts of appeal to pretermit a Jackson [ v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)] review since a defendant who prevails on this issue may be entitled to retrial on a lesser included offense or discharge if the State's evidence was insufficient.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 711 So. 2d 738 - State v. Clark