714 So. 2d 347 - State v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “imposition of a hefty criminal sentence pursuant to a patently `irrational' sentencing scheme `could not withstand a due process analysis' of any sort.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 882 So. 2d 890 - Bunkley v. State · 921 So. 2d 513 - State v. Barnum

2. “a development of fundamental significance.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 886 So. 2d 915 - Windom v. State · 835 So. 2d 248 - State v. Klayman

3. “[r]etroactive application would require hundreds of new trials, which would require expensive and timely preparation for old cases and necessitate the relocating of witnesses and evidence — in some cases for crimes that occurred a decade before”

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