Lockett v. Montemango’s Empirical Analysis
784 F.2d 78 · 1986
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2007
5 federal appellate · 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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Burks v. United States · Green v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Arizona v. Washington
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.
“is that the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that even though innocent he may be found guilty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a verdict of acquittal ... is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offence ... an'acquittal' cannot be divorced from the procedural context in which the action so characterized was taken.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an accused must suffer jeopardy before he can suffer double jeopardy”
2 later decisions 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.