Rawls v. Com.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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. “[A] sentence imposed in violation of a prescribed statutory range of punishment is void ab initio because the character of the judgment was not such as the [C]ourt had the power to render. Thus, a criminal defendant in that situation is entitled to a new sentencing hearing. This common law rule of jurisprudence will eliminate the need for courts to resort to speculation when determining how a jury would have sentenced a criminal defendant had the jury been properly instructed or had the jury properly followed correct instructions.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Latasha Michelle Gordon v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Botkin v. Commonwealth

2. “[i]n many instances, our jurisprudence require[d] a court to speculate regarding how a jury would have fixed a defendant's punishment had the jury been properly instructed or had the jury properly applied the correct instruction.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Watson · Grafmuller v. Commonwealth

3. ““A sentence in excess of one prescribed by law is not void ab initio because of the excess, but is good insofar as the power of the court extends, and is invalid only as to the excess.” ❖ íH * * ❖ Therefore, ... the trial court did not err in conforming the sentence to a term permitted by law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Latasha Michelle Gordon v. Commonwealth of Virginia