State v. Humphrey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “does not refer to a precise instant in time, we interpret this section as remaining silent as to a precipitating event. The prior history of the statute conflicts with the view that the section itself identifies a precipitating event. The original provision establishing a victim penalty assessment was enacted in 1977. The 1989 amendment to this section raised the amount of the assessment to $100 and included the following new language:”

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

2. “It is the intent of the legislature to provide increased financial support for the county and state crime victim and witness programs by requiring offenders to pay increased penalty assessments upon conviction of a gross misdemeanor or felony crime.... On the state level, the increased funds will allow the remedial intent of the crime victims compensation program to be more fully served.”

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

3. ““[I]n deciding whether the increase is remedial or substantive, we look to the effect, not the form of the law. We find that the increase in the amount of the assessment from $100 to $500 is more in the nature of a new liability than a remedial increase in an already existing obligation.... Because the ... amendment ... appears to create a new liability, we find it is not remedial.... ””

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