State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the existence of penalties for failure to comply with the limitation, the statute's nature, the legislative objective for the statute, and the potential consequences to the parties, such as injuries or wrongs.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Marberry v. MacHt · 361 Wis. 2d 23 - Bank of New York v. Shirley T. Carson

2. “in the following manner: Unlike a mandatory release situation where an inmate's sentence technically continues while on parole, a discharge date signals the end of a criminal sentence. Once an inmate has reached his or her discharge date, the appropriate amount of time has been served and the inmate should be released from custody. The DOC's authority over that person has ceased. (Emphasis added.) Similarly, in Grobarchik v. State, 102 Wis. 2d 461, 468 , 307 N.W.2d 170 (1981), the supreme court used the words”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 356 Wis. 2d 268 - State v. Stanley

3. “The petition against Thomas was filed three days after he was discharged from his criminal sentence. The State does not point to an administrative code section or statute allowing it to detain Thomas beyond his sentence's discharge date in order to file a Wis. Stat. ch. 980 petition, and we hold that it was without authority to do so.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 356 Wis. 2d 268 - State v. Stanley