Cothren v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on White v. Pearlman · ENDRIS v. State · Calhoun v. State · 389 So. 2d 712 - Massey v. State · Daugherty 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]s both parties agree, it would be improper to split the appellant’s second Na-trona County incarceration so that it would be interrupted by a period of probation. “The discretion of the trial court is also limited by the fact that a sentencing court may only impose those sentences that have been authorized by the legislature.” Daugherty v. State, 2002 WY 52, ¶ 13 , 44 P.3d 28, 33 (Wyo.2002) (citing Williams v. State, 949 P.2d 878, 880 (Wyo.1997)).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“One of the primary goals of probation is rehabilitation of the probationer. State v. McAuliffe , 2005 WY 165 , ¶ 21, 125 P.3d 276 , 281 (Wyo. 2005). Rehabilitation envisions that the probationer is bettering himself by, perhaps, furthering his education, developing career prospects, seeking treatment for drug or alcohol addictions, or contributing to the welfare of his family and community. Requiring the appellant to return to prison upon the completion of his probationary period would certainly impair his ability to rehabilitate his life and would derail any progress that he may have made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nitchman v. State“required that the appellant serve his term of incarceration concurrent with a sentence for which the appellant is presently incarcerated, as well as consecutive to a probationary period that has yet to begin. Because it is impossible to meet both these requirements, and because the sentence as pronounced would require the period of incarceration to be interrupted by a period of probation, the sentence is illegal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nitchman 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.