Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 961 P2D 941 - State v. Ivie

State v. Ivie’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2017

1 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

90199820002010decided

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

Applies 10 U.S.C. § 121 · 10 U.S.C. § 815 · 10 U.S.C. § 818 · 10 U.S.C. § 819 · 10 U.S.C. § 820 · 10 U.S.C. § 856 · 10 U.S.C. § 911 · 10 U.S.C. § 918

Relies on Argersinger v. Hamlin · United States v. Halper · Parker v. Levy · Kansas v. Hendricks · Hudson v. United States

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.

  1. “under such circumstances that the courts of [Washington] had jurisdiction thereof.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. ““Criminal prosecution” is not defined in the statute. Black’s define prosecution as “[a] criminal action; a proceeding instituted and carried on by due course of law, before a competent tribunal, for the purpose of determining the guilt or innocence of a person charged with a crime.” The meaning of “criminal prosecution” must further be determined from the statutory context in which it is used. RCW 10.43.040 is a double jeopardy statute and “criminal prosecution” is used therein to mean a proceeding to constitute jeopardy under double jeopardy jurisprudence.... [[Image here]] ... Referencing double jeopardy jurisprudence, we note the clause prohibits “multiple punishments for the same offense.” Thus the double jeopardy aspects of our statute focuses on whether the prior proceeding amounts to “punishment.” Meshing the dictionary definition of “criminal prosecution” with its double jeopardy basis we understand “criminal prosecution” to include a proceeding instituted under the rules of law to determine the guilt or innocence of a person accused of a criminal act where such proceeding threatens punishment under double jeopardy jurisprudence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Whenever upon the trial of any person for a crime, ... the defendant has already been ... convicted upon the merits, upon a criminal prosecution under the laws of [another] state or country, founded upon the act or omission with respect to which he is upon trial, such former ... conviction is a sufficient defense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.