Norris v. Morgan’s Empirical Analysis
622 F.3d 1276 · 2010
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Williams v. Taylor · Solem v. Helm · Harmelin v. Michigan · Atkins v. Virginia · Lockyer Attorney General of California v. Andrade
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A court must begin by comparing the gravity of the offense and the severity of the sentence.... “[I]n the rare case in which [this] threshold comparison ... leads to an inference of gross dispropor-tionality” the court should then compare the defendant’s sentence with the sentences received by other offenders in the same jurisdiction and with the sentences imposed for the same crime in other jurisdictions.... If this comparative analysis “validates an initial judgment that [the] sentence is grossly disproportionate,” the sentence is cruel and unusual.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent““[m]ost states that have ‘two strikes’ laws require sex offenses with some degree of penetration and infliction of serious bodily harm.” In addition, according to the state appellate court, only “[a] small[ ] number of states would impose a sentence of life in prison without parole for a second offense after a similar prior offense. For example, Georgia, Montana, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Wisconsin all have two strikes laws for some types of sexual offenses.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Norris’s sentence “reflects a rational legislative judgment, entitled to deference,” that sex offenders who have committed a serious or violent sex offense and who continue to commit such sex offenses must be permanéntly incapacitated. Norris’s thus is not “ ‘the rare case in which a threshold comparison of the crime committed and the sentences imposed leads to an inference of gross disproportionality,’” and we need go no further.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.