People v. Noline’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he procedure adopted by the People was designed to circumvent Colorado's important public policy of nonharassment. If the People considered the county court's dismissal to be erroneous, they could have appealed from that order to the district court. Not having done so, they cannot recommence the prosecution of defendant, irrespective of the means chosen for such prosecution, without demonstrating that they possess further evidence not previously considered by the county court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Noline

2. “[I]n the federal system, unlike the procedure established by § 16-5-204(4)(k), a court has no authority to go behind a grand jury indictment to determine whether such indictment is based on probable cause; the return of the indictment constitutes a conclusive determination that probable cause exists. Hence, a [United States] [C]ommissioner's determination to the contrary cannot preempt the grand jury's function.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Noline

3. “[O]nce the People fail to establish the existence of probable cause to believe that a defendant has committed an offense, such a defendant cannot be subjected to subsequent refilings, unless the People can demonstrate the existence of additional evidence not previously considered [for good cause].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Noline