Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 603 P2D 878 - Buck v. State

Buck v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
June 1992
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 1992

12 state decisions

90197919801990decided

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 Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Sanchez v. State · Knobel v. State · State v. Reisch

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

  1. ““The imposition of probation and, therefore, the revocation, lie in the sound discretion of the district court. “ ‘ * * * All that is essential is the court’s conscientious judgment after hearing the facts that the violation has occurred. This should not be an arbitrary action and should include a consideration of both the reasons underlying the original imposition of conditions, the violation of these, and the reasons leading to such violation. * * * ’ State v. Reisch, Wyo., 491 P.2d 1254, 1255 (1971). See Sanchez v. State, Wyo., 592 P.2d 1130 (1979).” Buck v. State, Wyo., 603 P.2d 878, 879 (1979). “The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain an order revoking probation is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court and its action will be reversed only upon a clear showing of abuse of discretion. The court cannot act arbitrarily, however, or according to whim or caprice.” 21 Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 568, p. 536 (1965).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Finally, there is no statutory, court rule, or judicial requirement for the trial judge to enter into the record the reasons for his determination to * * * [grant or deny] probation. Accordingly, error cannot be predicated thereon.””
    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.