Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause in Pennsylvania

12 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1977–2016 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Commonwealth v. Campanagreen
pa · 1973 · cited in 4 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1977–1984
2 sentences

1978The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs “only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243 , 304 A.2d 432, 436 (1973).

1978The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs “only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243 , 304 A.2d 432, 436 (1973).

44
Commonwealth v. Tomegreen
pa · 1979 · cited in 2 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1980–1982
2 sentences

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

12
Commonwealth v. Baldwingreen
pa · 2009 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016See also Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 604 Pa. 34 , 985 A.2d 830 (2009) (recognizing General Assembly’s prerogative to determine when offenses merge for sentencing and rejecting claim that Section 9765 elements test for merger violates federal double jeopardy clause); Commonwealth v. Wade, 33 A.3d 108 (Pa.Super. 2011) (stating: “There is nothing in the text of our constitution, the case law interpreting the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, or more modern Pennsylvania or federal jurisprudence that reveals that the Pennsylvania Constitution affords greater double jeopardy protections in the merge

2016See also Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 604 Pa. 34 , 985 A.2d 830 (2009) (recognizing General Assembly’s prerogative to determine when offenses merge for sentencing and rejecting claim that Section 9765 elements test for merger violates federal double jeopardy clause); Commonwealth v. Wade, 33 A.3d 108 (Pa.Super. 2011) (stating: “There is nothing in the text of our constitution, the case law interpreting the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, or more modern Pennsylvania or federal jurisprudence that reveals that the Pennsylvania Constitution affords greater double jeopardy protections in the merge

11
King v. United Statesgreen
cadc · 1938 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014“Until a convicted prisoner receives a sentence which can withstand attack, it may be conceived that his original jeopardy continues without interruption, and that he is therefore not put in jeopardy a second time when he receives his first valid sentence.” Id. at 347 , 178 A.2d at 731 (quoting King v. United States, 98 F.2d 291, 295 (D.C.Cir.1938)).

11
Commonwealth v. Rafalkogreen
pasuperct · 1984 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
2 sentences

1985See also Commonwealth v. Rafalko, 335 Pa.Super. 122 , 483 A.2d 986 (1984); Commonwealth v. Riffert, 322 Pa.Super. 230 , 469 A.2d 267 (1983).

1985See also Commonwealth v. Rafalko, 335 Pa.Super. 122 , 483 A.2d 986 (1984); Commonwealth v. Riffert, 322 Pa.Super. 230 , 469 A.2d 267 (1983).

11
Commonwealth v. Lovegreen
pasuperct · 1982 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
2 sentences

1983Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision." 295 Pa.Super.Ct. at 285-86, n. 6 , 441 A.2d at 1235, n. 6 .

1983Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision." 295 Pa.Super.Ct. at 285-86, n. 6 , 441 A.2d at 1235, n. 6 .

11
Commonwealth v. Corcorangreen
pasuperct · 1922 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
1 sentence

1980We read the reference to “double jeopardy” in Commonwealth v. Corcoran, 78 Pa.Super.Ct. 430, 433 (1922) as involving the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, since the case occurred forty-seven years before the Supreme Court of the United States for the first time held the federal double jeopardy clause applicable to the states.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (21)

CaseCitedYears
Commonwealth v. Campana green
pa · 1974
2 sentences

1981“The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Hogan, 482 Pa. 333, 342 , 393 A.2d 1133 (1978), quoting Commonwealth v. Campana, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974). 4 .

1981“The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Hogan, 482 Pa. 333, 342 , 393 A.2d 1133 (1978), quoting Commonwealth v. Campana, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974). 4 .

21977–1981
Commonwealth v. Wade green
pasuperct · 2011
1 sentence

2016See also Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 604 Pa. 34 , 985 A.2d 830 (2009) (recognizing General Assembly’s prerogative to determine when offenses merge for sentencing and rejecting claim that Section 9765 elements test for merger violates federal double jeopardy clause); Commonwealth v. Wade, 33 A.3d 108 (Pa.Super. 2011) (stating: “There is nothing in the text of our constitution, the case law interpreting the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, or more modern Pennsylvania or federal jurisprudence that reveals that the Pennsylvania Constitution affords greater double jeopardy protections in the merge

12016–2016
Commonwealth v. Melton green
pa · 1962
2 sentences

2014As of the early 1960’s, the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause protected defendants from retrial in the event that they obtained “an acquittal or its equivalent.” Melton, 406 Pa. at 347 , 178 A.2d at 730 .

2014As of the early 1960’s, the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause protected defendants from retrial in the event that they obtained “an acquittal or its equivalent.” Melton, 406 Pa. at 347 , 178 A.2d at 730 .

12014–2014
Commonwealth v. Thomas green
pa · 1972
2 sentences

2014The Constant Court also cited Commonwealth v. Thomas, 448 Pa. 42 , 292 A.2d 352 (1972) in support of its holding.

2014The Constant Court also cited Commonwealth v. Thomas, 448 Pa. 42 , 292 A.2d 352 (1972) in support of its holding.

12014–2014
Commonwealth v. Smith green
pa · 1992
1 sentence

2011Smith, 615 A.2d at 322 .

12011–2011
Commonwealth v. Wallace green
pa · 1983
2 sentences

1985Consequently, as Mr. Justice Nix observed in his concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Wallace, 500 Pa. 270 , 455 A.2d 1187 (1983), there is no longer a Pennsylvania double jeopardy standard barring retrial in cases of prosecutorial misconduct unless the misconduct was intended to provoke the defendant to move for a mistrial.

1985Consequently, as Mr. Justice Nix observed in his concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Wallace, 500 Pa. 270 , 455 A.2d 1187 (1983), there is no longer a Pennsylvania double jeopardy standard barring retrial in cases of prosecutorial misconduct unless the misconduct was intended to provoke the defendant to move for a mistrial.

11985–1985
Commonwealth v. Riffert green
pa · 1983
2 sentences

1985See also Commonwealth v. Rafalko, 335 Pa.Super. 122 , 483 A.2d 986 (1984); Commonwealth v. Riffert, 322 Pa.Super. 230 , 469 A.2d 267 (1983).

1985See also Commonwealth v. Rafalko, 335 Pa.Super. 122 , 483 A.2d 986 (1984); Commonwealth v. Riffert, 322 Pa.Super. 230 , 469 A.2d 267 (1983).

11985–1985
Commonwealth v. Silverman green
pa · 1971
2 sentences

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

11982–1982
Commonwealth v. Allen green
pa · 1971
2 sentences

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

11982–1982
Commonwealth v. Brown green
pa · 1974
2 sentences

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

1982Because I would hold that the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause would not bar a Commonwealth appeal under section 5 of Act 319, I would not need to resolve the apparent conflict over the applicability of that provision. [7] Insofar as Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261 , 398 A.2d 1369 (1979); Commonwealth v. Brown, 455 Pa. 274 , 314 A.2d 506 (1974); Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96 , 277 A.2d 803 (1971); and Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A.2d 308 (1971), rest upon Pennsylvania double jeopardy principles, they do not compel a different result.

11982–1982
Com. v. Hogan green
pa · 1978
2 sentences

1981“The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Hogan, 482 Pa. 333, 342 , 393 A.2d 1133 (1978), quoting Commonwealth v. Campana, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974). 4 .

1981“The Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause differs only stylistically from that contained in the Fifth Amendment.” Commonwealth v. Hogan, 482 Pa. 333, 342 , 393 A.2d 1133 (1978), quoting Commonwealth v. Campana, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974). 4 .

11981–1981
Bruton v. United States green
scotus · 1968
2 sentences

1981Defense counsel for Simms argued that the statement of Mills inculpating Simms violated Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), in which the United States Supreme Court held that the defendant’s conviction at a joint trial had to be set aside because the jury had heard the codefendant’s confession inculpating the defendant, even though a cautionary instruction to the jury to disregard the confession had been given.

1981Defense counsel for Simms argued that the statement of Mills inculpating Simms violated Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), in which the United States Supreme Court held that the defendant’s conviction at a joint trial had to be set aside because the jury had heard the codefendant’s confession inculpating the defendant, even though a cautionary instruction to the jury to disregard the confession had been given.

11981–1981
McCreary v. Commonwealth green
pa · 1857
1 sentence

1980E. g., Commonwealth v. Baker, 413 Pa. 105 , 196 A.2d 382 (1964); Commonwealth v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 (1933); McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 Pa. 323 (1857).

11980–1980
Commonwealth v. Baker green
pa · 1964
2 sentences

1980E. g., Commonwealth v. Baker, 413 Pa. 105 , 196 A.2d 382 (1964); Commonwealth v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 (1933); McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 Pa. 323 (1857).

1980E. g., Commonwealth v. Baker, 413 Pa. 105 , 196 A.2d 382 (1964); Commonwealth v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 (1933); McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 Pa. 323 (1857).

11980–1980
Benton v. Maryland green
scotus · 1969
2 sentences

1980Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 , 89 S.Ct. 2056 , 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969).

1980Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 , 89 S.Ct. 2056 , 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969).

11980–1980
Commonwealth v. Mitchell green
pa · 1980
2 sentences

1980Last year, without referring to McCreary, Simpson, Baker or Sparrow , the Court in Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261, 275 , 398 A.2d 1369, 1377 (1979), reached a contrary result by finding a state as well as federal double jeopardy violation with respect to a non-capital offense, 9 relying on Commonwealth v. Brown, supra. While these and other cases have produced some confusion, 10 we consider the issue to have been resolved in *515 favor of applying the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause to both capital and non-capital offenses, under the Court’s most recent holdings in Commonwealth v. Tome,

1980Last year, without referring to McCreary, Simpson, Baker or Sparrow , the Court in Commonwealth v. Tome, 484 Pa. 261, 275 , 398 A.2d 1369, 1377 (1979), reached a contrary result by finding a state as well as federal double jeopardy violation with respect to a non-capital offense, 9 relying on Commonwealth v. Brown, supra. While these and other cases have produced some confusion, 10 we consider the issue to have been resolved in *515 favor of applying the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause to both capital and non-capital offenses, under the Court’s most recent holdings in Commonwealth v. Tome,

11980–1980
Commonwealth v. Simpson green
pa · 1932
2 sentences

1980E. g., Commonwealth v. Baker, 413 Pa. 105 , 196 A.2d 382 (1964); Commonwealth v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 (1933); McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 Pa. 323 (1857).

1980E. g., Commonwealth v. Baker, 413 Pa. 105 , 196 A.2d 382 (1964); Commonwealth v. Simpson, 310 Pa. 380 , 165 A. 498 (1933); McCreary v. Commonwealth, 29 Pa. 323 (1857).

11980–1980
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Papy v. Maroney green
pa · 1965
2 sentences

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

11977–1977
Pennsylvania v. Campana green
scotus · 1973
2 sentences

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so-called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

11977–1977
Chenoweth v. Warner green
scotus · 1973
2 sentences

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so-called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

11977–1977
Christensen v. Board of Education of Township High School District No. 203 green
scotus · 1974
2 sentences

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

1977Papy v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 368 , 207 A.2d 814 (1965), or under the so- called merger doctrine discussed in the text, infra. For a further discussion of the Pennsylvania double jeopardy clause, see the opinion of Mr. Justice ROBERTS speaking for a plurality of the Court in Commonwealth v. Campana, 452 Pa. 233, 243-245 , 304 A.2d 432, 436-437 (1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 , 94 S.Ct. 73 , 38 L.Ed.2d 44 (1973), on remand, 455 Pa. 622 , 314 A.2d 854 (1974), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 969 , 94 S.Ct. 3172 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1974).

11977–1977

Statutes the citing opinions construe

PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2701 (3) PA § 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2702 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check