State v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably State v. Vontress (1998), State v. Vega-Fuentes (1998)
60 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 Martindale v. Tenny · State v. Gonzales · State v. Roderick · State v. Royse · State v. JC Sports Bar, Inc.
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(d) In addition to any other conditions of probation, suspension of sentence or assignment to a community correctional services program, the court shall order the defendant to comply with each of the following conditions: (1) Make reparation or restitution to the aggrieved party for the damage or loss caused by the defendant’s crime, in an amount and manner determined by the court and to the person specified by the court, unless the court finds compelling circumstances which would render a plan of restitution unworkable. If the court finds a plan of restitution unworkable, the court shall state on the record in detail the reasons therefor.” (Emphasis added.) See K.S.A. 21-4603d(a)(4) through (a)(9).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cooper““After a lawful sentence has been imposed under the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) for a crime committed on or after July 1,1993, committing a defendant to the custody of the Secretary of Corrections, the sentencing court lacks jurisdiction: (1) to modify the sentence except to correct ‘arithmetic or clerical errors’ pursuant to K.S.A. 21-4721(i); (2) to consider or reconsider departure from the presumptive sentence; or (3) to modify the sentence by reinstating a previously revoked probation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“no provisions are made for modifying a sentence that has already been imposed”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Jamerson
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.