State v. Straszkowski’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State v. Richard J. Sulla (2016), 2008 WI App 89 - State v. Hoppe (2009)
29 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 131 Wis. 2d 246 - State v. Bangert · 201 Wis. 2d 303 - State v. Bentley · 93 Wis. 2d 278 - Elias v. State · State v. Brown · 54 Wis. 2d 489 - Nelson 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“I [the defendant] understand that if any charges are read-in as part of a plea agreement they have the following effects: ... although the judge may consider read-in charges when imposing sentence, the maximum penalty will not be increased.. . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This procedure must be distinguished from a practice in this state, especially in Milwaukee, of charging a multiple offender with two or more offenses for which the evidence is most conclusive and bringing the judge's attention to additional uncharged offenses prior to sentencing. Upon agreement between the state and the accused, the judge may take these offenses into consideration and the prosecution agrees not to prosecute. It is expected the uncharged crimes will influence the length of the sentence for the crime or crimes the defendant has been found guilty of or to which he has [pled] guilty. The advantage of this technique to the accused is that he can clean his slate of several uncharged crimes with the safety of only receiving at the most the maximum sentence on the one or two crimes of which he is convicted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“means any crime that is uncharged or which is dismissed as part of a plea agreement, that the defendant agrees to be considered by the court at sentencing and that the court considers at the time of sentencing the defendant for the crime for which the defendant was convicted. Correspondence/Memorandum: Department of Justice, Aug. 11, 1995, at 2, in Bill Drafting File 1995 Wis. Act 141 (emphasis in original). 5 No. 2013AP2316-CR.awb or is deemed to admit the read-in charge for sentencing purposes.”
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.