777 So. 2d 856 - Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Now, turning to the mitigating circumstances enumerated by statute, the court notes for the record that the court, just as the jury, is entitled to consider any mitigating circumstance which it finds but is specifically required to look particularly at the mitigating circumstances enumerated by statute. The court is going to address each of the statutorily enumerated mitigating circumstances. The court wants to be sure that the record is clear that a non-finding or finding of a negative is not considered as an aggravating circumstance and is not considered against the defendant, but the court makes these findings simply so that the record will be clear that the court has considered each possible mitigating circumstance and finds that it does not exist in this case. "In particular with regard to the first enumerated mitigating circumstance, the court does not find that the defendant has no significant history of prior criminal activity. Instead, the court finds that the defendant has a very significant history of prior criminal activity. He was convicted of possession of a controlled substance for which he was sentenced to five (5) years in the penitentiary. He served a portion of the sentence and was thereafter paroled. "The second mitigating circumstance is that the defendant acted under extreme duress or under substantial dominance of another person.[ [19] ] The court does not find that this mitigating circumstance exists based upon the evidence presented in this case. "Th”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Hodges · Waldrop v. State

2. “[t]he capital offense was committed while the defendant was engaged ... [in a] rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping,”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Waldrop v. State · 896 So. 2d 584 - Clark v. State

3. “Attempts to bolster a witness by vouching for his credibility are normally improper and error.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Floyd v. State · 820 So. 2d 842 - Johnson v. State