Ex Parte Queen’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2018
12 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 · Richardson v. United States · Muniz v. State · Narvaiz v. State · Evans v. Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Before a defendant can be “twice put in jeopardy,” as contemplated by the Fifth Amendment, the original jeopardy must have terminated. “Absent a final judgment, [a defendant] remains under the initial jeopardy. Therefore, retrial for the same offense is not double jeopardy.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hanley v. State“Absent a final judgment, [a criminal defendant] remains under the initial jeopardy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. KOCMAN v. State
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.