Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 130 Idaho 839 - State v. Herrera

State v. Herrera’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
December 2014
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 2014

9 state decisions

70199720002010decided

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 State v. Toohill · State v. Reinke · State v. Hedger · State v. Brown · State v. Sanchez

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

  1. “[T]he minimum period generally will be treated as the probable measure of confinement for the purpose of sentence review. By focusing on this period, we do not wholly disregard the aggregate length of the sentence, nor do we suggest that a prisoner will be entitled to parole when the minimum period has elapsed; but we do recognize that he will be eligible for parole at that time.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “While we agree that the minimum period of incarceration may not always be an adequate predictive measure of probable confinement, we decline Mr. Herrera’s invitation to overrule the general rationale of State v. Sanchez. Although this Court does not normally consider the indeterminate portion of a defendant’s sentence, our holding in Sanchez does not necessarily preclude such an analysis. In fact, Sanchez expressly provides that a sentencing or appellate court ‘not wholly disregard the aggregate length of the sentence.’ Thus, while we continue to follow the rule in Sanchez , we leave open the possibility for an appellant to establish that special circumstances require consideration of more than the fixed period of confinement.”
    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.