State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2022
8 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 United States v. Halper · Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez · Austin v. United States · United States Marcus v. Hess · United States v. Ursery
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“so punitive either in purpose or effect as to negate that intention.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“has not adequately set forth any separate legal analysis”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“in rem forfeitures are less likely to be treated as criminal punishment than in personam penalties, [and therefore], any forfeiture that is not severe enough to constitute punishment under an in personam analysis cannot constitute punishment in the in rem context.”
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.