Baker v. Duckworth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 6 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The sentence as a[n] ... habitual criminal is not to be viewed as a new jeopardy or an additional penalty for the earlier crimes. It is a stiffened penalty for the latest crime which is to be considered an aggravated offense because a repetitive one.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Felicia A. Dothard · United States v. Scott D. Sheppard

2. “First, this court cannot ascertain with certainty the basis for the first jury's refusal to declare petitioner an habitual offender. The jury may have decided that the prosecution failed to prove Baker's previous convictions beyond a reasonable doubt, as required by statute. [Citation omitted.] - Alternatively, ike jury may have decided that even though the prosecution had proved Baker's prior convictions beyond a reasonable doubt, Baker did not deserve an enhanced sentence. (Emphasis sup,— plied.)”

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

3. “In this case, unlike Bullington, two independent juries considered Baker's prior criminal record in sentencing him for two unrelated thefts. Under these circumstances, this court cannot find that the first jury's decision not to enhance Baker's first theft sentence operated as an acquittal of the habitual offender status with regard to a subsequent, and distinct theft.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mers v. State