Bundy v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “‘ ‘ There is no doubt that a court may impose a sentence to commence upon the termination of another sentence imposed by another court unless a statute prohibits it. If a court exercising jurisdiction in criminal cases may lawfully impose a sentence to begin in the future on the expiration of a prior sentence, it can make no possible difference whether the prior sentence was imposed by the same or by some other court deriving its power from the same authority. Jurisdiction to inflict cumulative punisliruent is dependent, not on the accident that the offender has been convicted twice or oftener before the same tribunal, but on the fact that distinct violations of the law have been committed by one individual whose malefactions merit separate and, therefore, cumulative penalties. ’ ’ “The text is well supported by authorities. See Annotations, 5 A.L.E., 380, 53 A.L.E., 625, 4 Anno.Cas., 719. See also, 16 O.J. 1370, Our conclusion is that the trial court had the authority under the law to impose the sentence to commence upon the termination of the sentence thereafter imposed on plaintiff in error in Williamson County. ’'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mitchell v. State · 4 Tenn. Crim. App. 360 - Hayes v. State

2. “When any person has been convicted of two (2) or more offenses, judgment shall be rendered on each conviction after the first, providing that the terms of imprisonment to which such person is sentenced shall run concurrently or cumulatively in the discretion of the trial judge. * * *.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Britt v. Tollett