Ferrell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. The imposition of a harsher sentence by a judge following a new trial and conviction for the same charge is not violative of the federal, or Mississippi's Constitution. 2. Due process of law does require that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial. 3. Due process also requires that a defendant be freed of apprehension of such a retaliatory motivation on the part of the sentencing judge. 4. In order to assure that it may be determined on appeal whether such a motive was absent the following must occur: a. The judge must affirmatively state in the record his reasons for the harsher sentence. b. The reasons must be based upon objective information concerning identifiable conduct on the part of the defendant which occurred after the time of the original sentencing proceedings, or based upon objective information concerning events which occurred after the time of the original sentencing proceeding that may have thrown new light upon the defendant's life, health, habits, conduct or mental and moral propensities. c. The factual data upon which the increased sentence is based must be made a part of the record. d. This information and data upon which the judge bases his sentence may come to the judge's attention from evidence adduced at the second trial itself, from a new presentencing investigation, from the defendant's prison record, or possibly from other sources.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 897 So. 2d 921 - Payton v. State

2. “In Jackson, we stated, "Our law has long provided that the imposition of sentence following a criminal conviction is a matter within the discretion of the Circuit Court, subject only to statutory and constitutional limitations. So long as these are not offended, we rarely interfere. Moreover, the Court is not limited to the consideration of evidence presented of record at trial when imposing sentence."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 845 So. 2d 691 - Strohm v. State

3. “[a] defendant's constitutional rights are not violated when a sentencing court considers the information contained in a presentence investigation report in determining what sentence to impose.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 928 So. 2d 840 - Isom v. State