State v. Rockhold’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When it chose to vacate the sentence imposed by the original sentencing judge and to remand for resentencing, instead of simply deleting the illegal conditions placed on that sentence, as it could have, see, e.g., State v. Watts, 98-2594 (La.1/29/99), 786 So.2d 821 ; State ex rel. Meeks v. State, 98-1930 (La.1/29/99), 736 So.2d 820 , the court of appeal authorized the successor judge to impose the first lawful penalty in the case. State v. Husband, 593 So.2d 1257, 1258 (La.1992). Without regard to the question of whether a successor judge must consider the intent of the original sentencing judge when correcting an illegally harsh penalty as well as an illegally lenient one, see State v. Harris, 93-1098 (La.1/5/96), 665 So.2d 1164 , the successor judge in this case had the discretion to consider the intent of original sentencing judge and to resentence the defendant in a manner which effectuates as much of the original sentencing plan as the law allows.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 38 So. 3d 1265 - State v. Lippman