State v. Lingmann’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(Jn making sentencing determinations, judges have no obligation to make findings of fact, and we generally presume that the district court appropriately considered all the relevant evidence and statutory factors.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2014 UT App 210 - State v. Fretheim · 2015 UT App 249 - State v. Gailey

2. “To show that a judge relied upon irrelevant information at sentencing, a defendant must show '(1) evidence of reliance, such as an affirmative representation in the record that the judge actually relied on the specific information in reaching her decision, and (2) that the information she relied upon was irrelevant.”

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

3. “to adequately consider [Fretheim's] history, character, and rehabilitative needs, as well as the gravity and cireumstances of the offenses and the number of victims, and we can presume that [the trial court] did so.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2014 UT App 210 - State v. Fretheim