Reese v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 571 So. 2d 415 - Campbell v. State · 564 So. 2d 1060 - Porter v. State · 607 So. 2d 404 - Preston v. State · Kramer v. State · 750 So. 2d 6 - Bates 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court found three aggravators: (1) the homicide was committed during a burglary and sexual battery; (2) the homicide was heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC); and (3) the homicide was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner (CCP). The court found no statutory mitigators. The court found seven nonstatutory mitigators: (1) good jail record (minimal weight); (2) positive character traits (minimal weight); (3) defendant’s support of Jackie Grier and her children (very little weight); (4) his possessive relationship with Jackie Grier (minimal weight); (5) emotional immaturity (little weight); (6) possible use of drugs and alcohol around the time of the murder (little weight); and (7) lack of a significant criminal record (very slight weight). The court rejected the following nonstatutory miti-gators: (1) defendant’s adaptability to prison life; (2) childhood trauma other than the death of his mother; (3) emotional or mental impairment at the time of the murder; and (4) use of crack cocaine at the time of the murder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“traumatic childhood, possessive relationship with Jackie Grier, mental impairment at the time of the crime, and amenability to prison life,” Reese, 768 So.2d at 1058-59 , finding the record”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[b]ecause no new evidence was presented after the remand in the present case, nothing has changed since this Court's previous affirmance of CCP”
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.