Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 Wis. 2d 327 - State v. Krueger

119 Wis. 2d 327 - State v. Krueger’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably State v. Gallion (2004), State v. Harbor (2011)

36 state decisions

16019841990200020102020decided

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 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 70 Wis. 2d 179 - Ocanas v. State · 70 Wis. 2d 280 - Rosado v. State · 46 Wis. 2d 93 - Hayes v. States · 93 Wis. 2d 278 - Elias 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the defendant's criminal record, history of undesirable behavior patterns, personality and social traits, results of a presentence investigation, the aggravated nature of the crime, degree of culpability, demeanor at trial, remorse, repentance and cooperativeness, educational and employment history, the need for close rehabilitative control and the rights of the public.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] fact or set of facts highly relevant to the imposition of sentence, but not known to the trial judge at the time of original sentencing, either because it was not then in existence or because, even though it was then in existence, it was unknowingly overlooked by all of the parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “might be found if the trial court failed to state on the record the material factors [that] influenced its decision, gave too much weight to one factor in the face of contravening considerations, or relied on irrelevant or immaterial factors.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.