State v. Harvey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 23 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “contributes greatly to his moral blameworthiness. Defendant’s prior record is extensive and involves convictions for serious, violent crimes. On May 31, 1979, defendant pleaded guilty to rape, atrocious assault and battery. In October 1988, he pleaded guilty to first degree kidnaping and aggravating sexual assault. He also pleaded guilty to second degree attempted kidnaping, second degree burglary, and third degree burglary. He also was convicted of receiving stolen property. Defendant has broken into homes other than Schnaps’s: on the day of his arrest he broke into two homes. In one house, he attacked a couple with an ax; in another, he attempted to abduct a teenaged girl. Also, he later confessed to committing a number of burglaries in West Windsor. Harvey II, supra, 151 N.J. at 117 , 699 A.2d 596 . Suffice it to say, Nathaniel Harvey is a very dangerous man who has kidnaped, raped, robbed and killed. With respect to remorse, there is scant, if any, evidence of it. In his statement in allocution, he expressed no remorse for murdering Irene. Nor did he express any shame or humility for the pain and suffering he inflicted in Schnaps’s family. Finally, there in little hope of rehabilitation for Harvey. His prior record reveals that he has chosen for himself a life of violent crime. He has multiple convictions for rape, assault and kidnaping. The murder of Irene Schnaps was the culmination of an escalating pattern of violence. Defendant had been paroled in May 1983 for his sen”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Papasavvas

2. “1. Defendant’s moral blameworthiness a. Motive b. Premeditation c. Justification or excuse d. Evidence of mental disease, defect or disturbance e. No Knowledge of victim’s helplessness f. No Knowledge of effects on nondeeedent victims g. Defendant’s age h. Defendant’s involvement in planning the murder 2. Degree of victimization a. Violence and brutality of the murder b. Injury to nondeeedent victim 3. Character of defendant a. Prior record b. Other unrelated acts of violence c. Cooperation with authorities d. Remorse e. Capacity for rehabilitation. [State v. Harvey, 159 N.J. 277, 309 , 731 A.2d 1121 (1999) (Harvey III) (citing State v. Marshall, 130 N.J. 109, 155 , 613 A.2d 1059 (1992) (Marshall II)).]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Papasavvas

3. “Although defendant may not have known specifically that [the victim] had family and friends, we have previously recognized that “[w]hile a defendant might be unaware of the specific characteristics of his victims or of the particular survivors that the victim will leave behind, it is completely foreseeable that the killing will eliminate a unique person and destroy a web of familial relationships.” [Harvey III, supra, 159 N.J. at 313, 731 A.2d 1121 (quoting State v. Muhammad, 145 N.J. 23, 46 , 678 A.2d 164 (1996)) ].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Morton