Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 275 Or. 683 - State v. Stalheim

State v. Stalheim’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
17
states following
November 2008
most recently cited

60 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently November 2008 · most notably Walczak v. State (1985), 302 Pa. Super. 145 - Commonwealth v. Galloway (1982)

60 state decisions — followed in 17 states

4101976198019902000decided

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 People v. Lippner · People v. Becker · Basile v. United States · Barker v. Ireland · 24 Or. App. 99 - State v. Sullivan

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.

  1. ““The rule adopted by the majority properly limits ‘restitution’ and ‘reparation’ to ‘liquidated or easily measurable damages’ payable to the ‘aggrieved party,’ but limits that term to ‘the direct victim of a crime.’ I disagree with this further limitation in cases in which the ‘direct victim’ is a child or spouse who has died as a result of a crime. “Thus, if a child or married woman is assaulted and if, as a result, medical expenses are incurred, payment of such expenses could be required as a condition of probation, regardless of whether the bills for such expenses would otherwise be payable by the father or husband of the victim. But if the same victim then died, payment of the same bill for the same medical expenses could not be required. “In my view, it is far more reasonable in cases in which the ‘victim’ of the crime has died as a result of the crime to construe the term ‘aggrieved party’ to include the parents or spouse of the deceased ‘victim,’ . . . .” 275 Or. at 690 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the statute is interpreted broadly as to permit the imposition of unliquidated damages, thus including such losses as pain and suffering, decreased earning capacity, loss of consortium and the like, the trial judge will be forced to make evaluations of losses usually reserved to civil juries. In the usual case, the trial judge will not have the benefit of pleadings which frame the issues nor the testimony of witnesses to develop evidence relevant to the loss resulting from the defendant's wrongdoing. Thus, the trial judge is left in the difficult if not impossible position of having to assign a value to a loss he knows little about. . . . [W]e find it highly inappropriate to assign this task to a judge presiding over a criminal trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It must be admitted that the statute is drawn in general terms and is, therefore, susceptible to the broad interpretation urged by the state by which the court would be permitted to allow restitution or reparation in any reasonable amount which would be conducive to the defendant's rehabilitation consistent with the protection of the interests of the public. [ 275 Or. at 686 , 552 P.2d at 831 ],”
    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.