State v. Bearse’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2021
23 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Santobello v. New York · United States v. Brown · State v. Straw · 195 W. Va. 185 - State Ex Rel. Brewer v. Starcher · United States v. Shanahan
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A fundamental'component of plea bargaining is the prosecutor’s obligation to comply with a promise to make a sentencing- recommendation by doing more than “simply informing] the court of the promise the- State has made to the defendant with respect to sentencing.” The State must actually fulfill the promise. Where the State has promised to “recommend” a particular sentence, we have looked to the common definition of the word “recommend” and required the prosecutor to present the recommended sentence[] with his or her approval, to commend the sentence!] to the court, and to otherwise indicate to the court that the recommended ■sentence! ] [is] supported by the State and worthy of the court’s acceptance.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A proper objection by the defendant’s attorney would have alerted the sentencing court to the prosecutor’s breach of the plea agreement. In that circumstance, the court would have allowed the defendant to withdraw his guilty pleas, or would have scheduled a new sentencing hearing at which time the prosecutor could make the promised recommendations. The outcome of the defendant’s sentencing proceeding was different, however, because defense counsel did not make the necessary objection. Consequently, the defendant was sentenced by the court at a hearing tainted by the prosecutor’s improper comments.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he ability of the sentencing court to stand above the fray and overlook the conduct of the prosecutor cannot be used by the State to minimize the prejudice component of the analysis. Our system of justice requires more and does not allow prosecutors to make sentencing recommendations with a wink and a nod. The concept of justice has a far greater meaning.”
2 later decisions 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.