Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 684 N.E.2d 482 - Grinstead v. State

Grinstead v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Richardson v. State (1999), Hulfachor v. State (2000)

31 state decisions

230199720002010decided

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 · Benton v. Maryland · Rutledge v. United States · United States v. International Business MacHines Corp. · Davis 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “For the reasons explained in Games [v. State, 684 N.E.2d 466 (Ind.1997)], the rule of Derado and other cases holding to the same effect, see, e.g., Gregory-Bey v. State, 669 N.E.2d 154, 157-58 (Ind.1996), is no longer an accurate statement of federal double jeopardy law. To the contrary, review of multiple punishments under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Federal Constitution requires that we look only to the relevant statutes in applying Blockburger , and no further.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]here 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 an additional fact which the other does not.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Grin-stead's own testimony sufficed to convict him of murder under an accomplice theory.”
    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.