Stennett v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2014
20 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 · United States v. Halper · United States v. Dixon · Helvering v. Mitchell · Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth Ranch
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“punishment subject to the prohibition of the United States Constitution against imposing it in a separate proceeding from that in which other criminal punishments for the same offense are imposed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Diaz · State v. Perez“Unlike Montana, Texas does not impose its tax only on those who have been arrested and charged with a criminal offense. Instead, the obligation to pay the tax arises when the taxable event occurs, whether or not that event has yet come to the attention of law enforcement agencies, let alone become the subject of a criminal prosecution. Tex. Tax Code § 159.101(c). Moreover, the Texas legislature has provided a means for those who owe taxes on con trolled substances to pay their bills in confidence and thus satisfy their tax obligation without subjecting themselves to arrest or otherwise bringing upon themselves a criminal prosecution. Tex. Tax Code § 159.005.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Ward“satisfactory evidence that the legislature intended the tax on marihuana and other controlled substances to serve as further punishment for criminal conduct already punishable by heavy fines and protracted incarceration under the Texas Penal Code.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Hernandez
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.