142 Wis. 2d 331 - State v. Foley’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 2009
22 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 523
Relies on Kelly v. Robinson · Barnette v. Evans · 83 Wis. 2d 790 - Huggett v. State · United States v. Alexander · United States v. Carson
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“assumes that the trial court could not (without invading the province of the jury) determine restitution in an amount exceeding his misappropriations as found by the jury. . . . There is no constitutional right in a convicted defendant to have a jury determine the restitution required as a condition of probation. The determination of that amount is in the discretion of the trial court, subject to [the restitution statute].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he trial court correctly concluded that it could require, as a condition of Foley's probation, that he make restitution to the victims of his crime even though his civil liability to them had been discharged in bankruptcy. Because the federal bankruptcy courts defer to the sovereignty of the state in criminal prosecutions, the restitution order does not violate the supremacy clause of the federal constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fernandez“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 or the amount of any payment ordered under par. (a). No hearing is required unless this application is made.”
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.