Glaze v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[although Petitioner was nominally sentenced to prison for an uncounseled conviction, his time-served sentence was not in violation of Scott . Petitioner’s proposed application of Scott and Nichols would do nothing to prevent uncoun-seled losses of liberty. For example, if Petitioner had not been sentenced to time served, but rather to a fine, then he would now have no basis for saying that the marijuana conviction was improperly used for sentence enhancement. A fine for an uncounseled misdemeanor conviction is perfectly valid under Scott , so the conviction would have been available as a sentence enhancer under Nichols . Nevertheless, Petitioner still would have spent those ten days in jail.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Glaze v. Warden Ridgeland Correctional Institution

2. “[F]or a second offense or if, in the case of a first conviction ... the offender has been convicted of any of the laws of the United States or of any state, territory, or district relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant, stimulant, or hallucinogenic drugs, the offender must be imprisoned for not more than twenty-five years and fined not less than fifty thousand dollars.” S.C.Code Ann. § 44-53-375(B)(2) (2002).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Glaze v. Warden Ridgeland Correctional Institution