383 N.J. Super. 432 - State v. Webster’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 13701 (§ 20101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 42 U.S.C. § 13704 (§ 20104 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)
Relies on Higgins v. Pascack Valley Hospital · State v. Thomas · State v. Franklin · State v. Chapman · 175 N.J. Super. 130 - State v. Davis
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a period of post-release supervision and control that is sufficient in duration to ensure the inmate's successful transition into the community and to make certain that the person does not return to a life of crime and violence. (The 15 percent remainder of the original sentence may not be adequate for that purpose, especially when various prison credits are taken into account.) During the period of post-release supervision, the offender must be subject to monitoring and must be required to abide by general and special conditions of release. Furthermore ... any such sentencing law must be structured so that if the person violates a condition of supervision following release from prison, he or she would be subject to administrative revocation of parole and return to prison.... The Legislature must not make it more difficult for the Parole Board and the Bureau of Parole to hold violent offenders accountable for violating the terms and conditions of parole supervision following their eventual and inevitable release. [ Id. at 13-14.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[M]ost inmates sentenced under the 85 percent requirement would be automatically released ( i.e., "max out") on or shortly after the completion of the minimum fixed term of parole ineligibility prescribed by statute. The Parole Board would have neither the opportunity nor the authority to deny parole based on a prediction of future criminal behavior, the inmate's unwillingness to participate in treatment, or deficiencies in the inmate's parole plan.... His or her release would be dictated by operation of law rather than by a discretionary decision of the Parole Board. One of the witnesses before the Commission may have said it best when she observed that mandatory minimum sentencing usually means mandatory release from prison. [ Report of the Study Commission on Parole, supra, at 10-11.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“protect the public by incapacitating the most violent and predatory offenders,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.