State v. Saunders’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably State v. Radke (2003), State v. Bonds (2006)
24 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
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Jones v. United States · 119 Wis. 2d 612 - State v. Harris · 107 Wis. 2d 532 - State v. McAllister
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The actor is a repeater if the actor was convicted of a felony during the 5-year period immediately preceding the commission of the crime for which the actor presently is being sentenced . . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“statutory provisions that enhance a convicted criminal defendant's potential exposure to confinement.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“If an uncertified copy [of a judgment of conviction] contains inaccurate information about the prior conviction, the defendant should object to the accuracy of the document.... After all, a defendant is always permitted to contest the authenticity or, more likely, the accuracy of even a certified copy of a judgment of conviction. Human beings complete these forms and, although we would hope that typographical errors within these important documents are rare, errors may nonetheless exist.... Put simply, judicial personnel are not infallible. Accordingly, even a certified copy of a document establishing a prior conviction may be rebutted, just as an inaccuracy in a presentence investigation report may be challenged.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bonds
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.