Day v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2006
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · 476 So. 2d 158 - Albritton v. State · State v. Callaway · Davis v. State · 719 So. 2d 1230 - Nelson v. State
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A court may impose a departure below the lowest permissible sentence based upon circumstances or factors that reasonably justify the mitigation of the sentence in accordance with s. 921.0026. The level of proof necessary to establish facts supporting the mitigation of a sentence is a preponderance of the evidence. When multiple reasons exist to support the mitigation, the mitigation shall be upheld when at least one circumstance or factor justifies the mitigation regardless of the presence of other circumstances or factors found not to justify mitigation. Any sentence imposed below the lowest permissible sentence must be explained in writing by the trial court judge.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the legislative intent that departure sentences may be reversed only upon a showing that each reason given for a departure sentence is invalid”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[w]hen multiple reasons exist to support a departure from a guidelines sentence”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.