Yarbrough v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 43 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e hold that in the penalty-determination phase of a trial where the defendant has been convicted of capital murder, in response to a proffer of a proper instruction from the defendant prior to submitting the issue of penalty-determination to the jury or where the defendant asks for such an instruction following an inquiry from the jury during deliberations, the trial court shall instruct the jury that the words 'imprisonment for life' mean 'imprisonment for life without possibility of parole.' "). 5 Tellingly, the State acknowledged at oral argument that if future dangerousness was a factor, and the jury first reported finding an aggravator before going on to its sentencing recommendation, a Simmons charge would at that point be required. Tr. of Oral Arg. 32. We see no significant difference between that situation and the one presented here. Nor does Justice Thomas' dissent in this case plausibly urge any such distinction. See post, at 2-3. If the jurors should be told life means no parole in the hypothesized bifurcated sentencing proceeding, they should be equally well informed in the actual uninterrupted proceeding. 6 Animating Justice Thomas' dissent is the conviction that the limited information defense counsel was allowed to convey and the judge's charge "left no room for speculation by the jury.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Shafer v. South Carolina · State v. Shafer

2. “[u]nder our system, the assessment of punishment is a function of the judicial branch of government, while the administration of such punishment is a responsibility of the executive department. The aim of the rule followed in Virginia is to preserve, as effectively as possible, the separation of those functions during the process when the jury is fixing the penalty, in full recognition of the fact that the average juror is aware that some type of further consideration will usually be given to the sentence imposed.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Fishback v. Commonwealth · Anderson v. State

3. “Yarbrough and Dominic Jackson Rainey had attended high school together in Mecklenburg County prior to Rainey’s moving to Richmond with his mother. While on a subsequent visit to see his grandfather in Mecklenburg County, Rainey renewed his acquaintance with Yarbrough. On May 7,1997, Yarbrough told Rainey of his plan to rob Cyril Hugh Hamby, the 77-year-old owner of Hamby’s Store on U.S. Route 1 in Meck-lenburg County. The following evening, Yarbrough went to Rainey’s grandfather’s house and told Rainey that “he was ready to go rob Mr. Hamby.” Yarbrough and Rainey were seen walking along U.S. Route 1 toward Hamby’s Store between 9:30 and 10:30 p.m. on May 8, 1997. Yarbrough was armed with a shotgun. The two men waited at a picnic table across the road until there were no customers in the store. Yar-brough hid the shotgun under his coat and the two men entered the store. At Yarbrough’s direction, Rainey locked the front door. Yarbrough pointed the shotgun at Ham-by and ordered him to come out from behind the store’s counter. Yarbrough and Rainey took Hamby to the living quarters at the rear of the store where they found an electrical extension cord and string. Yarbrough brought Hamby back into the public area of the store, forced him to lie on the floor in an aisle, and tied Hamby’s hands behind his back with the extension cord and string. Yarbrough went to the store’s electrical circuit box and turned off the outside lights. He then demanded that Hamby reveal where guns were h”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 490 F. Supp. 2d 694 - Yarbrough v. Johnson