Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 N.J. 161 - State v. Wingler

State v. Wingler’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
2
states following
January 2009
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 6 district · 56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently January 2009 · most notably Doe v. Poritz (1995), Goldberg v. Housing Auth. of City of Newark (1962)

17 federal appellate · 6 district · 56 state decisions

200195719601970198019902000decided

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 Williams v. People of State of New York · Townsend v. Burke · Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish · Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners

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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “reasonable classification of criminals for purposes of sentence and release.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “capable of making an acceptable social adjustment in the community,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We have no occasion now to consider whether there is a scientific and factual basis for the `clinical finding' that this `offender's conduct' was `characterized' by a `pattern of repetitive, compulsive behavior'; it suffices here to say that when the Diagnostic Center makes the statutory findings, it becomes the peremptory `duty' of the court to `submit the offender' to a `program of specialized treatment for his mental and physical aberrations,' a course of action in no sense penal, but rather regenerative for his eventual social adjustment and integration, and meanwhile protective of society itself against such `repetitive, compulsive behavior,' due to `mental and physical aberrations.' It is a sociolegal measure wholly devoid of the punitive, in essence preventative and reformative, in keeping with the teachings of sociological and psychological experience. * * *”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.