Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Bischoff relied upon Indiana Code Section 35-50-1-2, which requires consecutive sentences when a defendant is being sentenced both for a crime committed while on probation and in a probation revocation. And where consecutive sentences are required, credit time cannot be earned against each of the underlying sentences. This court has noted in the past that Bisehoff only applies when mandatory consecutive sentences are at issue so as to prevent the award of “double credit time.” See, e.g., Diedrich v. State, 744 N.E.2d 1004 , 1007 n. 3 (Ind.Ct.App.2001). Mandatory consecutive sentences are not at issue here and, therefore, Bischoff is not applicable.”

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