State v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In Miller , the “Supreme Court of the United States held that the Eighth Amendment forbids ‘a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without possibility of parole for juvenile offenders.’ Miller , — U.S. at —, 132 S.Ct. at 2469 . Rather, the Supreme Court said,- juvenile offenders are entitled to individualized sentencing, where the sentencer takes ‘into account how children are different, and how those differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing them to a lifetime in prison.’ Id. “In Williams v. State, 183 So.3d 198 (Ala.Crim.App.2014), this Court held that claims based on Miller are nonju-risdictional claims properly raised in a collateral proceeding under Rule 32.1(a), Ala. R.Crim. P. 183 So.3d at 218: Further, this Court held that, under the framework established in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 , 109 S.Ct. 1060 , 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989), the rule announced in Miller is a new rule, and that it is not a substantive rule nor is it a ‘watershed’ procedural rule. 183 So.3d at 214. As a result, this Court held that Miller is not subject to retroactive application. 183 So.3d at 208. “ ‘ “A judge abuses his discretion only when his decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of law or where the record contains no evidence on which he rationally could have based his decision.” Miller v. State, 63 So.3d. 676, 697 (Ala.Crim.App.2010). State v. Thomas, 137 So.3d 933, 937 (Ala.Crim.App.2012). Herd, the granting of Boyd’s petition by the circuit court was based on an er”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jenkins · State v. Dailey