Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 WIAPP 7 - State v. Williams

State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2004
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 207 Wis. 2d 258 - State v. Smith · 93 Wis. 2d 278 - Elias v. State · Commonwealth v. Alvarado · United States v. Brown · 53 Wis. 2d 751 - Champlain v. State

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

  1. “'what the prosecutor may not do is personalize the information, adopt the same negative impression as [the author of the presentence investigation report] and then remind the court that the [author] had recommended a harsher sentence than recommended.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “After reading through the presentence, it appears that I think I can best describe my impression of this defendant as manipulative and unwilling to take any responsibility”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The presentence writer ... had indicated she would be in court, but I don't see that she has arrived. She had made a few comments that I will relay to the Court.”
    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.