Corbett v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 11 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]n adopting this rule, we did not take into account death penalty eases and the very special and unique fact-finding responsibilities of the sentencing judge in death eases. The trial judge has the single most important responsibility in the death penalty- process. Under this process, a trial judge may not impose the death penalty unless he or she articulates in writing his or her factual findings and reasons for imposing the death penalty. We have recognized the unique responsibilities of the sentencing judge in this regard and the necessity for independent evaluations and written factual findings concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances in imposing the death sentence. ... We conclude that fairness in this difficult area of death penalty proceedings dictates that the judge imposing the sentence should be the same judge who presided over the penalty phase proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Kenley

2. “a judge who is substituted before the initial trial on the merits is completed and who does not hear the evidence presented during the penalty phase of the trial, must conduct a new sentencing proceeding before a jury to assure that both the judge and jury hear the same evidence that will be determinative of whether a defendant lives or dies. To rule otherwise would make it difficult for a substitute judge to overrule a jury that has heard the testimony and the evidence, particularly one that has recommended the death sentence, because the judge may only rely on a cold record in making his or her evaluation. We conclude that fairness in this difficult area of death penalty proceedings dictates that the judge imposing the sentence should be the same judge who presided over the penalty phase proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 620 So. 2d 174 - Craig v. State