State v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
July 2010
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 115 Wis. 2d 371 - State v. Gilbert · 144 Wis. 2d 86 - State v. Boettcher · 124 Wis. 2d 372 - State v. Beets · 122 Wis. 2d 765 - State v. Nyborg · State v. Johnson
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although in Ward the sentences were imposed at the same time, the State has provided no reason, and we see none, why the same rationale does not apply when one sentence is imposed after the other, but is made concurrent to the first sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Johnson“the principle applied in Ward . . . applies in this case — that when a defendant is in custody, presentence, on two separate charges and the sentences are concurrent, the defendant is entitled to sentence credit against each sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carter“[a] defendant is not in custody in connection with the course of conduct for which the sentence is imposed until his custody is surrendered to that jurisdiction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carter
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.