769 So. 2d 1286 - State v. Scott’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. “1. Because this sentencing occurred prior to Johnson and Hayes, the defendant waived his three-day delay prior to sentencing and put on no evidence regarding reasons to downwardly depart from the mandatory sentence; 2. The instan[t] offense is a non-violent crime not involving a person; 3. The defendant’s prior convictions consist of possession of cocaine, middle-grade felony theft, and aggravated battery. Only one of these is a crime of violence and the record does not give any indication of the seriousness of the actual incident leading to that particular conviction; 4. The defendant was twenty-three years of age on the date the offense occurred and at the time he was convicted; 5. It is alleged that the defendant is mentally disabled. This is particularly important in this case because the record also indicates that the defendant had been offered a plea arrangement whereby he would plead guilty to an offense less serious than simple possession of cocaine, and upon acceptance of that plea no habitual offender bill would have been filed. The defendant rejected this offer and ultimately received the life without benefit of parole sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Scott

2. “It is important to note that the Johnson and Hayes cases were not yet decided at the time Mr. Scott was sentenced. Therefore, the defense counsel, the defendant and the trial court were all unaware that the defendant could have offered evidence prior to being sentenced as a habitual offender that would some how distinguish him as being “exceptional”, which would have allowed a downward departure from the mandatory life sentence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Scott

3. “For some reason the legislature in its infinite wisdom decided that this is going to be a mandatory sentence; and, in doing so, they put the word “shall” as opposed to be (sic) “may” which takes away the discretion the court has in whether or not I’m going to circumvent these provisions or not....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Scott