77 So. 3d 928 - State v. Dyer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he Eighth Amendment precludes the state from interposing the Governor’s ad hoc exercise of executive clemency as a gateway to accessing procedures the state has established for ameliorating long terms of imprisonment as part of the rehabilitative process to which inmates serving life terms for non-homicide crimes committed when they were under the age of 18 years would otherwise have access, once they reach the age of 45 years and have served 20 years of their sentences in actual custody. The state thus may not enforce the commutation provisos in La. R.S. 15:574.4(A)(2) and ' 15:574.4(B) against relators and all other similarly situated .persons, and the former provisions offer objective criteria set by the legislature that may bring Louisiana into compliance with the Graham [v. Florida ] decision. [Footnotes omitted.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 So. 3d 272 - State v. Graham · Carter, Bowie, McCullough v. State

2. “[U]nless eligible for parole at an earlier date, a person committed to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for a term or terms of imprisonment with or without benefit of parole for thirty years or more shall be eligible for parole consideration upon serving at least twenty years of the term or terms of imprisonment in actual custody and upon reaching the age of forty-five. This provision shall not apply to a person serving a life sentence unless the sentence has been commuted to a fixed term of years.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 104 So. 3d 137 - State v. Walder · 86 So. 3d 662 - State v. Macon

3. “We agree with relators that Louisiana must comply with the Graham [v. Flori da] decision but reject their proposed solution. In Graham [v. Florida ], the Supreme Court held that “for a juvenile offender who did not commit homicide the Eighth Amendment forbids the sentence of life without parole.” Graham [v. Florida], 560 U.S. at [74], 130 S.Ct. at 2030 . The Court specifically observed: “A State is not required to guarantee eventual freedom to a juvenile offender convicted of a nonhomicide crime. What the State must do, however, is give defendants ... some meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.” Id. The Court noted that a life sentence without parole “deprives the convict of the | i2most basic liberties without giving hope of restoration, except perhaps by executive clemency— the remote possibility of which does not mitigate the harshness of the sentence.” Id., 560 U.S. at [69-70], 130 S.Ct. at 2027 (citing Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 300-301 , 103 S.Ct. 3001, 3015 , 77 L.Ed.2d 637 (1983) (striking down a life sentence without parole for a habitual offender convicted of issuing a “no account” check, Court notes the difference between the availability of parole as a “regular part of the rehabilitative process” and commutation of sentence as “an ad hoc exercise of.executive clemency”)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 171 So. 3d 272 - State v. Graham