646 So. 2d 167 - Pittman v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 27 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. That the three First Degree Murders for which the Defendant is to be sentenced were not committed while the Defendant was under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbances, nor were they mitigated by the use of alcohol as suggested. To the contrary, the Court finds the Defendant [a] arranged the visit to his father’s house on the eve of the murders, the first time in months that he had been to his father’s house; [b] that he left the house by an outside door from a locked room; [c] walked the short distance in the early morning hours to the victim’s home; and [d] there cut the telephone lines to the outside of the house. The Defendant upon entering the victim’s home, systematically killed all the occupants of the house using a weapon that assured the least possibility of drawing the attention of witnesses. He then proceeded in a knowledgeable way to pour gasoline about the house and out into the yard. Testimony at the trial revealed that he understood the use of fire to destroy evidence'. Before setting the fire, however, he secured the keys to Bonnie Knowlesf] car for the purpose of his getaway. The Defendant’s actions and all other evi-dentiary circumstances considered show a direct conscious plan to kill and avoid apprehension. These actions do not indicate a person functioning under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbances. In regard to the influence of alcohol, other than the expert’s opinion, the record does not reflect it to have been ”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pittman v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections · 90 So. 3d 794 - Pittman v. State

2. “[E]vidence of bad acts or crimes is admissible without regard to whether it is similar fact evidence if it is relevant to establish a material issue.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Taylor v. State · 817 So. 2d 741 - Dennis v. State

3. “1. As an aggravating circumstance, the Defendant, David Joseph Pittman, was proven beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt to have a previous conviction of a felony involving the use or threat of violence; to wit: Aggravated Assault. (Case No. CF85-3584A1—Sentenced on March 12, 1986.) 2. As an aggravating circumstance, the Defendant, David Joseph Pittman, was proven beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt to have committed two previous capital felonies as to each of the three murders for which he has been found guilty; to wit: the murders of Bonnie Knowles and Barbara Knowles as to the murder of Clarence Knowles; the murders of Barbara Knowles and Clarence Knowles as to the murder of Bonnie Knowles; the murders of Clarence Knowles and Bonnie Knowles as to the murder of Barbara Knowles. 3. As an aggravating circumstance, the commission of the First Degree Murder of Bonnie Knowles was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel. By testimony and evidence in the record the court finds that the State proved beyond and to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt that Bonnie Knowles experienced conscious pain and suffering before death as a result of the Defendant cutting and stabbing Bonnie Knowles numerous times with a knife or similar object. 4. As an aggravating circumstance, the commission of the First Degree Murder of Barbara Knowles was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel. By the testimony and evidence in the record the Court finds that the State prove”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pittman v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections