Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 695 SW2D 215 - January v. State

January v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2014

20 state decisions

1201985199020002010decided

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 · Ashe v. Swenson · Brown v. Ohio · Abney v. United States · Missouri v. Hunter

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

  1. “[T]he 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
  2. “[ejven if two offenses are sufficiently different to permit the imposition of consecutive sentences, successive prosecutions will be barred in some circumstances where the second prosecution requires the relitigation of factual issues already resolved by the first.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “By creatively choosing which elements it hoped to prove by the same evidence, the State was able to convict appellant for two aggravated offenses in two prosecutions, wherein the aggravating element for each offense was the other offense... (223).”
    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.