227 Wis. 2d 495 - State v. Spears’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably State v. Gallion (2004), State v. Naydihor (2004)
34 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 North Carolina v. Alford · United States v. Tucker · 102 Wis. 2d 58 - Hartung v. Hartung · Gross v. Hoffman · 369 So. 2d 118 - State v. Cox
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'(1) the gravity and nature of the offense, including the effect on the victim, (2) the character and rehabilitative needs of the offender, and (3) the need to protect the public.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hall · State v. Naydihor“The trial court may also consider: the defendant's past record of criminal offenses; the defendant's history of undesirable behavior patterns; the defendant's personality, character and social traits; the presentence investigation results; the viciousness or aggravated nature of the defendant's crime; the degree of the defendant's culpability; the defendant's demeanor at trial; the defendant's age, educational background and employment record; the defendant's remorse, repentance or cooperativeness; the defendant's rehabilitative needs; the rehabilitative needs of the victim; and, the needs and rights of the public.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hall“The court should ... not attempt to measure the relative value of the victim's life. While the defendant may benefit when no one appears to mourn the deceased, there is no corresponding right to argue that "since nobody else cares, why should we" or to otherwise diminish the value of the victim's life. Even though there might be circumstances in which the court could weigh the positive contributions and worth of the victim in assessing the harm caused by the crime, it does not follow that there is a right to have a court consider that a victim was a terrible burden on society.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Gallion
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.