State v. Trujillo’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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.

1. “1. If the inmate is serving the term of confinement in prison portion of the sentence, a reduction in the term of confinement in prison by the amount of time remaining in the term of confinement in prison portion of the sentence, less up to 30 days, and a corresponding increase in the term of extended supervision. 2. If the inmate is confined in prison upon revocation of extended supervision, a reduction in the amount of time remaining in the period of confinement in prison imposed upon revocation, less up to 30 days, and a corresponding increase in the term of extended supervision. (h) 1. If the court adjusts a sentence under par. (g) on the basis of a change in law or procedure as provided under par. (b)3. and the total sentence length of the adjusted sentence is greater than the maximum sentence length that the offender could have received if the change in law or procedure had been applicable when the inmate was originally sentenced, the court may reduce the length of the term of extended supervision so that the total sentence length does not exceed the maximum sentence length of that the offender could have received if the change in law or procedure had been applicable when the inmate was originally sentenced. 2. If the court adjusts a sentence under par. (g) on the basis of a change in law or procedure as provided under par. (b)(3). and the adjusted term of extended supervision is greater than the maximum term of extended supervision that the offender could have received”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stenklyft

2. “Any of the following is a ground for petition under par. (a): 1. The inmate's conduct, efforts at and progress in rehabilitation, or participation and progress in education, treatment, or other correctional programs since he or she was sentenced. 3. A change in law or procedure related to sentencing or revocation of extended supervision effective after the inmate was sentenced that would have resulted in a shorter term of confinement in prison or, if the inmate was returned to prison upon revocation of extended supervision, a shorter period of confinement in prison upon revocation, if the change had been applicable when the inmate was sentenced. 4. The inmate is subject to a sentence of confinement in another state or the inmate is in the United States illegally and may be deported. 5. Sentence adjustment is otherwise in the interests of justice.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stenklyft

3. “Act 109 does not alter an offender's right to seek sentence modification on these grounds. It does, however, create additional procedures for modifying a bifurcated sentence. Brennan et al., Fully Implementing Truth-in-Sentencing, Wisconsin Lawyer, Nov. 2002, at 53 (footnote omitted). ¶ 46. Moreover, while this court in Trujillo held that we will continue to apply existing new factor jurisprudence in the aftermath of TIS-II and § 973.195, we did not conclude in Trujillo that § 973.195 in any way mandated that we adhere to our existing jurisprudence. Rather, we recognized that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stenklyft