555 So. 2d 196 - Freeman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"The first [statutory mitigating circumstance listed in the statute] is that the defendant had no significant history of prior criminal activity. The court has fully reviewed the criminal history provided [in the pre-sentence investigation report] under records of arrest, dates, jurisdictions, and dispositions involving the defendant, Mr. Davis, from 1982 up and through the present date. And the court finds that lack of ... significant history of prior criminal activity would not be a mitigating circumstance and is not a mitigating circumstance in the case of the defendant, Mr. Davis." In its sentencing order, the trial court made the following findings: ".... That the defendant in fact does have a significant history of criminal activity. The written presentence investigation report reflects that since 1982 the defendant's Juvenile Court history reflects adjudications of delinquency for theft, receiving stolen property and trespass. The defendant's misdemeanor history since 1987 reflects adjudications of guilt for theft, resisting arrest, assault, and trespass. The defendant was in addition convicted of the felony robbery 3rd degree in 1992."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 718 So. 2d 90 - Madison v. State · 718 So. 2d 1166 - Ex Parte Davis

2. “"In deciding upon the sentence, the trial court shall determine whether the aggravating circumstances it finds to exist outweigh the mitigating circumstances it finds to exist, and in doing so the trial court shall consider the recommendation of the jury contained in its advisory verdict, unless such a verdict has been waived pursuant to section 13A-5-46 (a) or 13A-5-46 (g). While the jury's recommendation concerning sentence shall be given consideration, it is not binding upon the court."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Knotts v. State · 628 So. 2d 988 - Coral v. State

3. “"On the trial for any offense which may be punished capitally ..., it is a good cause of challenge by the state that the person would refuse to impose the death penalty regardless of the evidence produced...."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 836 So. 2d 915 - Jackson v. State