490 So. 2d 1325 - Peake v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We do not believe that- the validity of reason #4 is governed by the cases which have disapproved the trial court’s reliance upon the defendant’s apparent untruthfulness at trial or lack of remorse. See Perez v. State, 485 So.2d 24 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Hubler v. State, 458 So.2d 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Guerrero v. State, 484 So.2d 59 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1986); and Pursell v. State, 483 So.2d 94 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1986). In Hubler , the defendant pled not guilty, went to trial, and presented certain alibi witnesses. The jury found him guilty. In departing from the .guidelines sentence, the trial court gave as reasons Hubler’s lack of remorse and his apparent subornation of perjury. In reversing, this Court stated: [WJhere the defendant has at all times denied committing the battery charged and has persisted in maintaining his innocence, we conclude that it was improper for the trial court to aggravate the sentence imposed because the defendant failed to exhibit remorse for having committed the offense. This is but a corollary of the rule that a .trial court may not impose a greater sentence because the defendant has availed himself-of his constitutional right to a trial by jury (citations omitted). Id. at 353 . In the instant case, as reflected in the presentence investigation report, the defendant admitted the offenses from the time of his arrest. However, in an apparent effort to mitigate his conduct (as opposed to a defense to the charges), he claimed that his eight year old stepdaug”

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