958 So. 2d 860 - Ex Parte Head’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. “"`The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects a defendant in a criminal proceeding against multiple punishments or repeated prosecutions for the same offense.' United States v. Dinitz, 424 U.S. 600, 606 , 96 S.Ct. 1075 , 47 L.Ed.2d 267 (1976) (footnote omitted). The Fifth Amendment provides: 'No person shall . . . be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. . . .' U.S. Const. amend. V. See also Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497, 503 , 98 S.Ct. 824 , 54 L.Ed.2d 717 (1978) ('A State may not put a defendant in jeopardy twice for the same offense.'). The underlying policy of this constitutional principle is that "`the State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity, as well as enhancing the possibility that even though innocent he may be found guilty.' " Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 187-88 , 78 S.Ct. 221 , 2 L.Ed.2d 199 (1957)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 980 So. 2d 966 - Ex Parte Gillentine