State v. Garner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In State v. Cook, 95-2784 (La.5/31/96), 674 So.2d 957 , cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1043 , 117 S.Ct. 615 , 136 L.Ed.2d 539 (1996), the Louisiana Supreme Court emphasized that “[t]he only relevant question on review ... of a sentence [is] “whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” Id. at 959 (citation omitted). “The standard for appellate review for constitutional excessiveness is whether the sentence is ‘nothing more than the purposeless imposition of pain and suffering’ or is ‘grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime.’ ” State v. Richard, 94-1263, p. 5 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/17/95), 657 So.2d 258, 261 , citing State v. Guidry, 94-607 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/7/94) , 647 So.2d 511 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 774 So. 2d 263 - State v. Clements

2. “[t]he trial judge may take into consideration the fact that the Defendant's actions were more serious than the conviction reflects.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 827 So. 2d 553 - State v. Charles

3. “even where a defendant is a first offender, the district court is not required to suspend or probate the sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 968 So. 2d 146 - State v. Desoto