107 Wis. 2d 726 - State v. Pope’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably 148 Wis. 2d 1 - State v. Franklin (1989), 110 Wis. 2d 133 - State v. Cuyler (1983)
35 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Grayson · Roberts v. United States · 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 83 Wis. 2d 790 - Huggett v. State · 57 Wis. 2d 611 - State v. Gerard
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In determining the amount and method of payment, the court shall consider the financial resources and future ability of the probationer to pay. The court may provide for payment to the victim up to but not in excess of the pecuniary loss caused by the offense. Upon the order of the court, the district attorney or an official of a law enforcement agency, as defined in s. 165.83(l)(b), shall document the nature and amount of the victim’s pecuniary loss. Upon the application of any interested party, the court shall schedule and hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the value of the victim’s pecuniary loss resulting from the offense. The court shall not establish a payment schedule extending beyond the maximum term of probation that could have been imposed for the offense under sub. (2).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The language of sec. 973.09, Stats., demonstrates that the restitution hearing is not intended to be an adversary civil trial. 3 The statute does not require that a certain evidentiary standard be employed or that the equivalent of a civil trial be held. The hearing is to establish the amount of damages which can be the basis for restitution, not a trial to establish civil liability.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Due process requires a factual hearing to determine the grounds of revocation [of probation] and that the defendant be informed of his probation violations, be able to confront his adversary, and be heard if he wishes. The same reasoning must apply to a restitution hearing. The state must afford notice of the hearing with an opportunity to confront the victim’s claim for pecuniary loss and also an opportunity to be heard. Due process does not require that the rules of evi dence and civil burden of proof apply to a restitution hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Tuttle
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.