Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 OHIOMISC2D 34 - State v. Ackrouche

State v. Ackrouche’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
May 1997
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Halper · United States v. Dixon · Austin v. United States · Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth Ranch · Hoban v. Rice

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

  1. “We have recognized in other contexts that punishment serves the twin aims of retribution and deterrence .... [I]t follows that a civil sanction that cannot fairly be said solely to serve a remedial purpose, but rather can only be explained as also serving either retributive or deterrent purposes, is punishment, as we have come to understand the term. . . . We therefore hold that under the Double Jeopardy Clause a defendant who already has been punished in a criminal prosecution may not be subjected to an additional civil sanction to the extent that the second sanction may not fairly be characterized as remedial, but only as a deterrent or retribution.”
    2 later decisions 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.