473 So. 2d 366 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Appellant was 43 years of age at the time of the crime. Although he had a traffic conviction in 1982, he was officially classified as a first offender. He had been married but once to Creó-la Smith, with whom he lived until her recent death. Four children (sons) were bom to this couple, and all are doing well. Smith was employed as a juvenile officer with the St. James Parish Sheriffs Office for many years prior to his conviction. He had served in the U.S. Army, been a professional baseball player and was a volunteer in civic and community endeavors. He was, the trial judge said, “... well thought of ...” In giving Smith five years, the trial judge correctly pointed out that Smith served as a “... role model for the youth of the parish ...” and that he had violated “... his oath of office and the trust placed in him ...” However, the trial judge also stated that “... there is an undue risk that during the period of a suspended sentence or probation, this defendant would commit another crime ...” Nothing in the record or in Smith’s history suggests such a probability. While receiving stolen things valued at over $500.00 is serious, it is a nonviolent offense. Under the special circumstances of this case, we believe that the five year sentence was excessive and that Smith’s many law-abiding, productive years should have been given more recognition. The State, in its brief, argues that the imposed sentence was warranted, but we were not provided with even one case in which a fir”

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