State v. Armstrong’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. “The State did not present any direct evidence during the sentencing hearing to prove that the expectation of pecuniary gain motivated Hoskins to take Crystel’s life. The State relied primarily on two witnesses who testified at trial that Hos-kins had told them he planned to car-jack someone someday. Based on these witnesses’ trial testimony and on circumstantial evidence, the judge found beyond a reasonable doubt that Hoskins murdered Crystel Cabral with the expectation of pecuniary gain. We cannot say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a jury hearing the same evidence as did the judge would have interpreted the circumstantial evidence or assessed the witnesses’ credibility as did the judge. The defense presented an expert who diagnosed Hoskins as having Bipolar II Disorder and testified that the disorder could have contributed to Hoskins’ conduct. We also cannot say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a jury hearing the same evidence as did the judge would have assessed the defense expert’s testimony similarly and would have failed to find mental impairment, a statutory mitigating circumstance.”

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

2. “announced a new procedural rule that does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct review.”

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