Commonwealth v. Melvin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he Miller Court concluded that sentencing for juveniles must be individualized. This requires consideration of the defendant's age at the time of the offense, as well as "its hallmark features," including: immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences[;] ... the family and home environment that surrounds him-and from which he cannot usually extricate himself-no matter how brutal or dysfunctional[;] ... the circumstances of the homicide offense, including the extent of his participation in the conduct and the way familial and peer pressures may have affected him[;] ... that he might have been charged and convicted of a lesser offense if not for incompetencies associated with youth-for example, his inability to deal with police officers or prosecutors (including on a plea agreement) or his incapacity to assist his own attorneys[;] ... [and] the possibility of rehabilitation ... when the circumstances [ i.e. (the youthfulness of the offender) ] most suggest it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. White

2. “For those defendants [convicted of first or second-degree murder prior to June 25, 2012,] for whom the sentencing court determines a [life without parole] sentence is inappropriate, [ 9 ] it is our determination here that they are subject to a mandatory maximum sentence of life imprisonment as required by Section 1102.1(a), accompanied by a minimum sentence determined by the common pleas court upon resentencing[.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Blount

3. “When reviewing the legality of a sentence, our standard of review is de novo and our scope of review is plenary.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Blount