Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 WIAPP 15 - State v. Reynolds

State v. Reynolds’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Berger v. United States · Gross v. Hoffman · 208 Wis. 2d 142 - State v. Carter · 47 Wis. 2d 541 - Denny 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “record does not reflect the sentencing judge's awareness of the information in the presentence investigation report, and of the factors the trial judge found significant in... the withholding of sentence, resentencing is appropriate.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “when the judge is not the one who presided at the original sentencing, it is particularly important that the judge, '[l]ike the appellate court,... be able to rely upon the entire record, including the previous comments at the first sentencing.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “essential to a fair sentencing after revocation.”
    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.