Doe v. Donovan’s Empirical Analysis
747 F.2d 42 · 1984
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2001
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
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 Younger v. Harris · Abney v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Arizona v. Washington · 31 Cal. 3d 503 - Stone v. Superior Court
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although we have no need to reach the merits of appellant’s broader claim that the double jeopardy clause prohibits declaration of a mistrial without first inquiring of the jury whether it has reached verdicts on each included offense, we acknowledge that it raises serious questions. The issue has been discussed by the appellate courts of nine states, including as a result of this action, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In support of appellant’s position, see Stone v. Superior Court of San Diego County, 31 Cal.3d 503 , 183 Cal.Rptr. 647 , 646 P.2d 809 (1983); State v. Pugliese, 120 N.H. 728 , 422 A.2d 1319 (1980); State v. Castrillo, 90 N.M. 608 , 566 P.2d 1146 (1977). But see State v. Booker, 306 N.C. 302, 293 S.E.2d 78 (1982); People v. Hickey, 103 Mich.App. 350 , 303 N.W.2d 19 (1981); People v. Hall, 25 Ill.App.3d 992 , 324 N.E.2d 50 (1975); Walters v. State, 255 Ark. 904 , 503 S.W.2d 895 (1974); State v. Hutter, 145 Neb. 798 , 18 N.W.2d 203 (1945). The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found against appellant on this issue. A Juvenile v. Commonwealth, 392 Mass. 52 , 465 N.E.2d 240 (1984).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a colorable double jeopardy claim may constitute the threat of injury necessary to fall within the exception to the Younger abstention principle,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mannes v. Gillespie“[b]ecause of the unique jurisdictional posture of this case,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mannes v. Gillespie
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.