Sexton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

63 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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “is not a comparison between the number of aggravating and mitigating circumstances.”

   14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Parker v. State · Pearce v. State

2. “A trial court's determination concerning the relative culpability of the co-perpetrators in a first-degree murder case is a finding of fact and will be sustained on review if supported by competent substantial evidence.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 803 So. 2d 629 - Hertz v. State · 803 So. 2d 656 - Looney v. State

3. ““This Court has consistently found a ... hearing unwarranted where a defendant presents general complaints about defense counsel’s trial strategy and no formal allegations of incompetence have been made. See Davis v. State, 703 So.2d 1055, 1058-59 (Fla.1997); Gudinas [v. State ], 693 So.2d [953] at 962 n. 12 [ (Fla.1997) ]; Branch v. State, 685 So.2d 1250, 1252 (Fla.1996). Similarly, a trial court does not err in failing to conduct a[n] ... inquiry where the defendant merely expresses dissatisfaction with his attorney. See Davis, 703 So.2d at 1058-59 ; Branch, 685 So.2d at 1252 ; Dunn v. State, 730 So.2d 309, 311-12 (Fla. 4th DCA1999).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Boyle v. State · Mansfield v. State