State v. Lindsey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under the second factor, we consider whether an offense affects the public at large, reflects moral delinquency, or carries a sufficient disgrace to require labeling the offense as constitutionally serious. In applying the second factor, the legislature’s perception of an offense, as reflected by its statements in legislative history, often provides a strong indication of society’s view of the gravity of an offense.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Basabe · State v. Sullivan

2. “Primary emphasis, however, must be placed on the maximum authorized period of incarceration. Penalties such as probation or a fine may engender “a significant infringement of personal freedom,” but they cannot approximate in severity the loss of liberty that a prison term entails. Indeed, because incarceration is an “intrinsically different” foxm of punishment, it is the most powerful indication of whether an offense is “serious.””

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

3. “mix of penalties,” the treatment of the offense at common law, and the gravity of the offense, unequivocally demonstrates that society demands that persons charged with the offense at issue be afforded the right to a jury trial. (Footnote omitted.) 6 . See HRS § 806-60 (1993): Any defendant charged with a serious crime shall have the right to trial by a jury of twelve members.”

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