Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““... [In the case at bar] [a]ppellant was given no legal consideration regarding punishment. The only consideration the State had given in this so-called bargain was a refusal to exercise its right to demand a jury trial. We hold that for a plea to be ‘negotiated’ under section 1918c(4)(a)(l), there must be some consideration from the State which in some way affects the possible punishment a defendant could receive. Otherwise, the word ‘negotiated’ would have no meaning in the context of the statute. Exact punishment need not be fixed, ..., but some concession or agreement as to punishment besides that it will be later adjudicated must be in the product of the negotiations. If some punishment arrangement is not in the bargain, the magistrate may not preside over any part of the proceedings_ We hold ... that in using the phrase ‘negotiated pleas,’ the legislature intended that those cases in which some agreement as to punishment has not been made cannot be referred to a magistrate. With no agreement as to punishment, except that no agreement will be made, the plea has not been ‘negotiated’ within the intent of the legislature.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Scott v. State

2. ““(a) The judge of a court having a magistrate appointed as provided by this act may refer to the magistrate any criminal case for proceedings involving: (1) negotiated pleas of guilty before the court; (6) any other matters that the judge deems necessary and proper, except as otherwise provided by Subsection (b) of this section. (b) In no event may a judge refer to a magistrate a criminal case permitting the magistrate to preside over a trial on the merits.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Scott v. State