State v. Olivier’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] State may remedy a Miller violation by permitting juvenile homicide offenders to be considered for parole, rather than by resentencing them”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Henry · State v. Preston

2. “The Louisiana legislature promptly addressed the Miller directive against mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juvenile killers by devising a sentencing procedure which would require that a trial court sentencing a youthful offender review all pertinent factors before determining whether parole eligibility was warranted. By its very application to only murderers under the age of 18, the provisions of La. C. Cr. P. art. 878.1 mandating a sentencing hearing at which the defense will be given an opportunity to present mitigating factors-which obviously include the defendant's age as an important part of his social history-satisfy Miller 's requirement that mitigating factors favoring a juvenile killer be heard in a proceeding held for that purpose... ... life without parole is still a constitutionally acceptable sentence for adult killers and it is not a prohibited sentence for all juvenile killers. Our legislature carefully designed an adequate solution by adding a new statute pertaining to parole eligibility for juvenile killers which is to be read in conjunction with the first and second degree murder statutes. In the event that the trial court imposes a life sentence with parole eligibility, La. R.S. 15:574.4(E) provides conditions which must be satisfied before the defendant can apply to the parole board for parole consideration. (Emphasis supplied). Either sentencing scheme of life imprisonment with parole, or life imprisonment without parole, is proper and not unco”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 247 So. 3d 129 - State v. Williams

3. “by the United States Supreme Court. What those decisions mean was recently explained by this Court: In Miller v. Alabama [,] the United States Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to sentence juvenile homicide offenders to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The Supreme Court's decision did not explicitly ban sentencing juvenile homicide offenders to life in prison without possibility of parole.... State v. Olivier , 17-0724, p. 4 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2/21/18), 238 So.3d 606 , 609, writ denied , 18-0492 (La. 1/14/19), 261 So.3d 783 . Numerous decisions have noted that”

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