Ex Parte Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he dicta in Kyzer conflicts with the plain language of the Alabama Criminal Code (as the Kyzer Court itself acknowledged). Section [13-11-6] states that “[aggravating circumstances shall be the following.” The language “shall be” — as opposed to “shall include” — indicates that the list is intended to be exclusive.... Our dicta to the contrary in Kyzer was incorrect.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Magwood v. Warden · Magwood v. WARDEN, ALABAMA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS

2. ““After reviewing the evidence presented of the aggravating circumstances and the mitigating circumstances, we cannot say with the necessary certainty that the error did not affect the jury’s recommendation. “Stephens’s defense counsel presented significant mitigating evidence during the sentencing phase of trial. Catherine Lee Boyer, a forensic psychologist, testified that Stephens has a verbal IQ of 73 and a performance IQ of 86, and a combined full-scale IQ score of 77. She described this score as ‘borderline.’ Boyer also testified that the circumstances of the murders were consistent with rage or ‘extreme emotional state,’ as opposed to a calculated or planned killing, and that Stephens’s behavior in the hours following the murder indicated remorse. Stephens’s mother testified that Stephens loved his children, including Nicholas, that he had been a caring and responsible father, and that he ‘could not have been in his “right mind” ’ when he committed the murders. “Despite evidence of the heinous, atrocious, and cruel nature of the offense, and despite Stephens’s 1992 attack on Annie, two jurors voted for a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The jury might have voted for the death penalty if it had been instructed on only the two valid statutory aggravating circumstances. However, we are unable to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it would have done so. “A recommendation of death must be based on a vote of at least 10 jurors. § 13A-5-49(f), Ala.Code 1975.”

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

3. “by one act or pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 982 So. 2d 1155 - Stephens v. State