57 Wis. 2d 572 - State v. Foellmi’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably 70 Wis. 2d 280 - Rosado v. State (1975), 113 Wis. 2d 662 - State v. MacEmon (1983)
44 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 46 Wis. 2d 93 - Hayes v. States · 54 Wis. 2d 569 - Lange v. State · District Attorney for the N. Dist. v. Superior Court · 54 Wis. 2d 613 - State Ex Rel. Warren v. County Court of Shawano-Menominee County · Pruitt 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] trial court should not reduce a sentence on 'reflection' alone or simply because it has thought the matter over and has second thoughts. It must base its modification on 'new factors' brought to its attention.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“6.1 Authority to reduce: general. (a) It may be appropriate to authorize the sentencing court to reduce or modify a sentence within a specified time after its imposition or the final resolution of an appeal if new factors bearing on the sentence are made known. . ..”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““We are aware there are counter arguments to the modification of our present rule, i.e., that the sentencing process must at some point come to an end and there are other ameliorative devices such as appellate review of sentencing or the pardoning power to provide relief. Within reasonable limits we think an unjust sentence should be corrected by the trial court. It is more important to be able to settle a matter right with a little uncertainty than to settle it wrong irrevocably. It should be kept in mind that under the indeterminate-sentence law the modification of a sentence in most cases can only affect a reduction of the maximum term of the sentence or the time the defendant can be kept under control of the state. The minimum term and eligibility to parole are determined by statute. The place of detention, amount of security, length of incarceration and parole are matters within the primary jurisdiction of the Department of Health & Social Services under its program of rehabilitating criminals.””
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.