Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 69 N.J. 205 - State v. Valentine

State v. Valentine’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
December 2000
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 2000

9 state decisions

301976198019902000decided

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 Brady v. United States · State v. Davis · State v. Currie · State v. Cooper · State v. Ruiz

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. “entail[s][an] analysis of the evidence [in a particular case] in terms of ... the time and place of each purported violation; whether the proof submitted as to one count of the indictment would be a necessary ingredient to a conviction under another count; whether one act was an integral part of a larger scheme or episode; the intent of the accused; and the consequences of the criminal standards transgressed,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “two-pronged test for merger cases: first, it must be ascertained whether the legislature has in fact undertaken to create separate offenses; and, if so, it must then be determined whether those separate offenses have been established under the proofs.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “`fairness and fulfillment of reasonable expectations'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.