State v. Gordon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

43 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Although the trial judge has the discretion to order concurrent sentences for two offenses both of which are independent of each other in time and space, a defendant has no right to receive concurrent sentences. Further, we are unpersuaded by claims of ignorance with respect to matters clearly obvious to the everyday layman. Both offenses for which appellant stood charged occurred on separate occasions. The most basic logic and reflection make it apparent that separate offenses merit separate punishments. Only one experienced in the law of sentencing would be aware that the trial judge has the discretion to order concurrent sentences for separate crimes and such person, of course, would have no argument if he received consecutive sentences. "It is clear that Boykin requires that the record indicate that defendants understand the consequences of their guilty pleas. However, this court is of the opinion that the real thrust of Boykin is that a defendant may not be permitted to give up constitutional rights unless he is aware of them and voluntarily waives them. A defendant has no constitutional right to receive concurrent sentences for two separate offenses whether the sentence is imposed pursuant to a plea of guilty or after a verdict of guilt is rendered by a jury. Even if Boykin requires that a defendant be aware of certain consequences of a guilty plea other than the giving up of constitutional rights, we are of the opinion that such a requirement would not apply to a cons”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 411 So. 2d 824 - Sheehan v. State

2. “If multiple sentences of imprisonment are imposed on a person at the same time ... [the sentences] shall run concurrently unless the court expressly directs otherwise, in which case the court shall set forth on the record the reason for its sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hallman

3. “An act or omission which is made punishable in different ways by different sections of the laws may be punished under both, but in no event may sentences be other than concurrent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hallman