State v. Maberry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

64 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Because a defendant appears in person before the trial judge, the trial judge is, in most instances, better able than we to evaluate him and to determine what is necessary to rehabilitate him to constructive activity. It is for this reason that the legislature has given the trial court wide discretion to sentence a defendant for a period somewhere between a statutory minimum and a statutory maximum. * * * We have traditionally been prone to uphold a sentence declared by a trial judge when it is in conformity with the statute and there is no clear evidence that he has abused his power in the particular case.””

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sowards · State v. Salinas

2. “"According to modern legal thought reformation and rehabilitation of offenders rather than retribution are the important goals of criminal jurisprudence. Williams v. People of State of New York, 337 U.S. 241 , 69 S.Ct. 1079 , 93 L.Ed. 1337 (1949). To state this dominant objective is to say — borrowing the words of the late Dean Roscoe Pound — that `criminal law [is] made a means to social ends * * *. [P]unishment is to be governed by its social end and is to be fixed with reference to the future rather than to the past.' I Pound, Jurisprudence, 134 (1959)." State v. Maberry, 93 Ariz. 306, 308 , 380 P.2d 604, 605 (1963).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 6 Ariz. App. 241 - State v. Arce

3. ““B. Upon an appeal from the judgment or from the sentence on the ground that it is excessive, the court shall have the power to reduce the extent or duration of the punishment imposed, if, in its opinion, the conviction is proper, but the punishment imposed is greater than under the circumstances of the case ought to be inflicted. In such a case, the supreme court shall impose any legal sentence, not more severe than that originally imposed, which in its opinion is proper. Such sentence shall be enforced by the court from which the appeal was taken.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Linsner