State v. Gomez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 22 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. “(2) The defendant has a previous history of criminal convictions or criminal behavior, in addition to those necessary to establish the appropriate range; (3) The defendant was the leader in the commission of an offense involving two or more criminal actors; (7) The personal injuries inflicted upon, or the amount of damage to property sustained by or taken from the victim is particularly great; (9) The defendant before trial or sentencing failed to comply with the conditions of a sentence involving release into the community; and (15) The defendant abused a position of public or private trust or used a professional license in a manner that significantly facilitated the commission or fulfillment of the offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State of Tennessee v. Marcus Dwayne Welcome

2. “[T]he relevant inquiry is whether the Reform Act mandates imposition of a sentence increased above the presumptive sentence when a judge finds an enhancement factor. Although the dissent [in Gomez] is correct that the Reform Act requires trial judges to determine whether enhancement factors exist [before an increase may be imposed], the dissent fails to recognize that the finding of an enhancement factor does not mandate an increased sentence. Booker explains that the mandatory increase of a sentence is the crucial issue which courts must consider in determining whether a particular sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Schiefelbein

3. “(1) The evidence, if any, received at the trial and the sentencing hearing; (2) The presentence report; (3) The principles of sentencing and arguments as to sentencing alternatives; (4) The nature and characteristics of the criminal conduct involved; (5) Evidence and information offered by the parties on the mitigating and enhancement factors set out in §§ 40-35-113 and 40-35-114; 32 (6) Any statistical information provided by the administrative office of the courts as to sentencing practices for similar offenses in Tennessee; and (7) Any statement the defendant wishes to make in the defendant’s own behalf about sentencing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise