471 So. 2d 332 - Cabello v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 148 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 166 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] prior conviction `of another capital offense or of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person' is admissible ... as an aggravating circumstance to be considered by the jury in determining punishment.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 684 So. 2d 1179 - Williams v. State · 670 So. 2d 816 - Russell v. State

2. “... the court's initial response should be that the defense be given a reasonable opportunity to examine the newly produced documents, photographs, etc.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jones v. State · 508 So. 2d 1067 - Robinson v. State

3. “The facts now before us are distinguishable from those upon which Enmund was decided. Specifically, we think unbelievable, in view of the evidence, the premise that sixteen-year-old Frank, Jr. single-handedly bound, gagged and strangled the adult male victim while Frank, Sr. stood by and neither killed, attempted to kill, nor intended a killing or that lethal force would be employed to insure the robbery's success. Rather, the alternative inference is logical: that Cabello, the father and family leader, was the dominant party in the crime. We are of the opinion that the Enmund shield does not extend to protect this defendant as revealed by the evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 524 So. 2d 313 - Cabello v. State · 532 So. 2d 1207 - White v. State