Abercrombie v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
88 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably Anglemyer v. State (2007), Smylie v. State (2005)
88 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 Gardner v. State · Page v. State · Inman v. State · Mott v. State · Gingerich 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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"However, it is clear, that in every case where increased sentences are imposed the record must show that careful consideration commensurate with the denial of liberty involved has been given to the defendant. Due care must be taken to demonstrate a thorough and thoughtful sentencing decision supported by specific and detailed reasons and an indication that the court has considered the goal of rehabilitation. The record must show that the determination of the increased sentence was based upon a consideration of the facts of the specific crime, the aggravating and mitigating cireumstanc-es involved and the relation of the sentence imposed to the objectives which will be served by that sentence."”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ridenour v. State · Allen v. State“'When the sentencing judge is required to make a statement of the reasons for imposing a particular sentence, two important goals are served. First, the judge is confined to proper grounds for either increasing or decreasing the presumptive sentence provided for the offense; and second, the appellate court is enabled to determine the reasonableness of the sentence imposed under the circumstances.' Ambercrombie v. State, (1981), Ind. [ 275 Ind. 407 ], 417 N.E.2d 316, 319 . 'In order to carry out our function of reviewing the trial court's exercise of discretion in sentencing, we must be told of his reasons for imposing the sentence which he did”
7 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. McMahon v. State · Page v. State“First the sentencing court must make a record of the statement of the court's reasons for selecting the sentence imposed. Second, the sentencing judge must consider certain factors, and still other factors may be considered as mitigating or aggravating circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. State · Hill v. State
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.