Ramirez v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
68 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Roman v. State (1994), Murray v. State (1992)
68 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 Clark v. State · Drapeau v. State · Cooper v. State · Barlow's, Inc. v. Bannock Cleaning Corp. · Phillips v. State
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Post-conviction relief obviously is not a proper avenue for challenging a judge’s exercise of discretion, as opposed to his lawful authority, in sentencing. See, I.C. § 19-4901. Excessiveness does not equate to illegality unless an Eighth Amendment (“cruel and unusual punishment”) issue is raised. There is no such allegation here. A motion to reduce an allegedly excessive, albeit lawful, sentence may be made under Rule 35,1.C.R., within 120 days after the sentence is imposed. In this case, Ramirez timely filed, pro se, a “Petition Seeking Justice and Reconsider [sic] ... Resentencing.” The trial judge treated the petition as a Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence and he denied it. Ramirez failed to appeal. The post-conviction relief applications he filed nearly five years later do not now afford us any occasion to reexamine the Rule 35 question. Compare Almada v. State, 108 Idaho 221 , 697 P.2d 1235 (Ct.App.1985).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ferrier v. State
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.