83 So. 2d 694 - Blackburn v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

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

1. ““The law is uniform and well established that ‘punishment for a conspiracy to commit crime and for the overt act which is the object of the conspiracy does not constitute double punishment,’ or double jeopardy, even where the substantive offense is the overt act involved in the conspiracy charge. 15 Am.Jur., Criminal Law, section 385, p. 60, 1954 Supp., p. 13; 22 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 288, p. 432; Annotation 92 L.Ed. 198 ; United States v. Wexler, 2 Cir., 79 F.2d 526 ; Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640 , 66 S.Ct. 1180 , 90 L.Ed. 1489 . The rule rests on the principle that the commission of a substantive crime and a conspiracy to commit the substantive crime are separate and distinct offenses. Brown v. State, 130 Fla. 479 , 178 So. 153 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. State

2. ““We have considered all other assignments of error and are not persuaded that the trial court committed reversible error in entering the judgment and sentence appealed from.” Blackburn v. State, Fla., 83 So.2d 694 , 696.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mayo v. Blackburn