Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 761 NE2D 831 - Spivey v. State

Spivey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
1
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

105 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Richardson v. State · Ashton v. Anderson · Griffin 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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The test is not merely whether the evi-dentiary facts used to establish one of the essential elements of one offense may also have been used to establish one of the essential elements of a second challenged offense. In other words, under the Richardson actual evidence test, the Indiana Double Jeopardy Clause is not violated when the evidentiary facts establishing the essential elements of one offense also establish only one or even several, but not all, of the essential elements of a second offense.”
    32 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a defendant must demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the evidentiary facts used by the fact-finder to establish the essential elements of one offense may also have been used to establish the essential elements of a second challenged offense.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'identify the essential elements of each of the challenged crimes and to evaluate the evidence from the [fact-finder's] perspec tive.'”
    7 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.