State v. Scruggs’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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

1. “As the court of appeals in this case explained, "since this appeal involves only a single felony conviction, Radaj does not control our decision." Unlike Radaj, which involved multiple surcharges for multiple felony convictions, this case addresses whether a single DNA surcharge for a single felony conviction is punitive.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Williams

2. “has failed to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the $250 DNA surcharge that the circuit court imposed on her for a single felony conviction constitutes a punishment and, thus, [did not] violate[] the prohibitions against ex post facto laws in the U[nited] S[tates] and Wisconsin Constitutions.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Tabitha A. Scruggs

3. “Scruggs has pointed to nothing, other than speculation, that the disparity between the surcharges on a conviction for a felony as compared to a misdemeanor reflects that the legislature was motivated by a punitive intent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Tabitha A. Scruggs