State v. Kuechler’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 175 Wis. 2d 653 - State v. Echols · 56 Wis. 2d 286 - State Ex Rel. Pedersen v. Blessinger · 147 Wis. 2d 429 - State v. Spears · 185 Wis. 2d 117 - State v. Iglesias · State v. Jorgensen
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]here is no requirement that a court give separate reasons for imposing jail or prison time than it gives for imposing a fine and that [t]he trial court's sentencing colloquy applies to both the prison time imposed and to the fine.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he trial court's sentencing colloquy applies to both the prison time imposed and to the fine”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(c) In determining whether to impose a fine and its amount, the court should consider: (i) the financial resources of the defendant and the burden that payment of a fine will impose, with due regard to his other obligations; (ii) the ability of the defendant to pay a fine on an installment basis or on other conditions to be fixed by the court; (iii) the extent to which payment of a fine will interfere with the ability of the defendant to make any ordered restitution or reparation to the victim of the crime; and (iv) whether there are particular reasons which make a fine appropriate as a deterrent to the offense involved or appropriate as a corrective measure for the defendant.”
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.