2000 WI App 208 - State v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2021
10 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 18 U.S.C. § 982 (§ 1366 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 31 U.S.C. § 5316
Relies on Austin v. United States · United States v. Bajakajian · United States v. One Single Family Residence Located at 18755 North Bay Road · 122 Wis. 2d 431 - County of Racine v. Smith · State v. Seraphine
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] punitive forfeiture violates the Excessive Fines Clause if it is grossly disproportional to the gravity of a defendant's offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the fine commonly imposed upon similarly situated offenders.”
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.