State v. Derello’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Because the trial court record was silent on whether [the] convictions were committed on the same occasion,” we remanded the matter for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the offenses were indeed separate historical prior felony convictions. Id. 2 . Indeed, had defendant objected at trial that the forgery offense was too old to qualify as a historical prior felony conviction, the State would in all probability have then sought to admit defendant’s prison”

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

2. “No “all-encompassing test” exists to determine whether different crimes occur on the “same occasion.” Rather, a court must consider the spatial and temporal relationship between the two crimes, whether the crimes involved the same or different victims, whether the crimes were continuous and uninterrupted, and whether they were directed to the accomplishment of a single criminal objective.”

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

3. “for purposes of sentence enhancement constitutes fundamental error”

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