565 So. 2d 669 - Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'does not end the matter. "The standard was and remains whether the plea represents a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action open to the defendant.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 606 So. 2d 615 - Brooks v. State · 565 So. 2d 294 - Lochli v. State

2. “the test . . . for determining the constitutional validity of a state court guilty plea where the defendant has been given sentencing misinformation is whether the defendant was aware of actual sentencing possibilities, and, if not, whether accurate information would have made any difference in his decision to enter a plea”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 565 So. 2d 294 - Lochli v. State · 601 So. 2d 180 - Trice v. State

3. ““ ‘Erroneous advice from counsel or the court that the maximum sentence was greater than that allowed by the statute does not necessarily prejudice a defendant unless the facts demonstrate that the error was likely to have altered the defendant’s decision to plead guilty. Under some circumstances, the actual penalty may itself be so formidable or the overstatement so small that it is improbable the error would have had any effect. Thus, in Allen v. United States, 634 F.2d 316, 317 (5th Cir.1981), a case in which the defendant had pleaded guilty to bank robbery charges after being advised of an exaggerated penalty, we stated: ‘It is inherently incredible that a person would voluntarily submit himself to a possible thirty-five year sentence but would take his chances on getting an acquittal if he faced only a twenty-five year sentence.’ “ ‘... But whether the defendant might have decided to plead differently cannot be determined simply by measuring the degree to which the penalty was overstated. That decision must be based on consideration of all the facts confronting the defendant. [[Image here]] “ ‘At times we have granted relief when a guilty plea was entered in reliance on an overstatement of the possible sentence. In each case, however, we have found that the defendant was erroneously induced to believe that he would benefit from pleading guilty.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 606 So. 2d 615 - Brooks v. State