492 So. 2d 1055 - Marek v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The evidence in this case clearly established that appellant, not Wigley, was the dominant actor in this criminal episode. Both appellant and the victim’s traveling companion testified that appellant talked to the two women for approximately forty-five minutes after he stopped, purportedly to aid them. During most of this conversation, Wigley remained in the truck. When Wigley got out of the truck to join appellant, he remained silent. Appellant, not Wigley, persuaded the victim to get in the truck with the two men. That evidence was reinforced by the testimony of three witnesses who came into contact with the appellant and Wigley on the beach at approximately the time of the murder, which indicated that appellant appeared to be the more dominant of the two men. Finally, only appellant’s fingerprint was found inside the observation deck where the body was discovered. This evidence, in our view, justifies a conclusion that appellant was the dominant participant in this crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 14 So. 3d 985 - Marek v. State

2. “when the circumstances indicate that the defendant was the dominating force behind the homicide, even though the defendant's accomplice received a life sentence for participation in the same crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 648 So. 2d 660 - Heath v. State

3. “cruel and unusual, arbitrary, and unequal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Marek v. Singletary