Scott v. Singletary’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 1 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. “[i]n Scott’s case, the particular facts persuade me that there is no reasonable doubt but that the jury would have applied the cruel definition to the exclusion of the vaguer heinous and atrocious definitions. My reason is that the facts of the instant murder constitute overwhelming evidence of a “high degree of pain” and “utter indifference to the suffering of others.” In other words the facts clearly focused the jury on the high degree of pain and the utter indifference of Scott to the victim’s suffering.... The jury having heard those facts and the instruction which was given, I readily conclude, to a high degree of certainty, that the jury applied the more specific cruel definition.... Although it is clear that the entire heinous, atrocious or cruel instruction was deficient, it is far from clear that the jury relied upon the unconstitutionally vague portion; indeed, I conclude (with a high degree of certainty) quite the contrary.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Cooke v. Singletary