Greenway v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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. “We agree with the sentencing judge that defendant's upbringing was subnormal. The record supports the judge's conclusion that defendant's home life was sadly lacking and that his mother's erratic behavior toward defendant inhibited his emotional development and social skills .... Although we recognize defendant's upbringing as a mitigating circumstance, we accord it little weight. While defendant's inadequate upbringing may have contributed to his emotional immaturity and undeveloped humanitarian skills, we concur with defendant's statement at his sentencing hearing that "people that have had as bad a background or worse haven't killed. And I don't want what everyone has said about my background to be an excuse for what's happened." .... The record demonstrates defendant's longtime substance abuse problems. We note, however, that defendant's general problems with substance abuse are not essential to our decision here. We therefore decline to conclude that defendant was impaired by alcohol consumption to an extent that it interfered with his "capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law." A.R.S. § 13-703(G)(1).... [W]e find that defendant expressed remorse for the victim's death on more than one occasion .... We recognize remorse as a nonstatutory mitigating factor .... However, defendant's remorse for his actions does little to counterbalance especial cruelty as a serious aggravating circumstance in Ms. Reid's”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Spreitz v. Ryan

2. “). Each case must be reviewed on its unique facts. We therefore must examine the state court decisions in Spreitz's case to determine whether they properly took into account all mitigating factors. 2 A At all relevant times in this case, the operative Arizona death penalty statute required a sentencing court to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Spreitz v. Ryan

3. “that the sentencing judge must consider any aspect of the defendant's character or record and any circumstance of the offense relevant to determining whether the death penalty should be imposed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Spreitz v. Ryan