Farina v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the evidence [supporting the avoid arrest aggravator] must prove that the sole or dominant motive for the killing was to eliminate a witness,”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Parker v. State · Philmore v. State

2. “[The HAC aggravator] focuses on the means and manner in which death is inflicted and the immediate circumstances surrounding the death....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 136 So. 3d 1125 - Leonard Patrick Gonzalez, Jr. v. State of Florida · 841 So. 2d 362 - Lynch v. State

3. “In order to establish the CCP aggravator, the evidence must show that the killing was the product of cool and calm reflection and not an act prompted by emotional frenzy, panic, or a fit of rage (cold), and that the defendant had a careful plan or prearranged design to commit murder before the fatal incident (calculated), and that the defendant exhibited heightened premeditation (premeditated), and that the defendant had no pretense of moral or legal justification. Jackson v. State, 648 So.2d 85, 89 (Fla. 1994) (citations omitted); accord Walls v. State, 641 So.2d 381 (Fla.1994). While "heightened premeditation" may be inferred from the circumstances of the killing, it also requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of "premeditation over and above what is required for unaggravated first-degree murder." Walls, 641 So.2d at 388 . The "plan to kill cannot be inferred solely from a plan to commit, or the commission of, another felony." Geralds v. State, 601 So.2d 1157, 1163 (Fla.1992). However, CCP can be indicated by the circumstances if they point to such facts as advance procurement of a weapon, lack of resistance or provocation, and the appearance of a killing carried out as a matter of course. See Bell v. State, 699 So.2d 674, 677 (Fla.1997).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Philmore v. State · 55 So. 3d 1267 - Allred v. State