Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 675 NW2D 615 - State v. Welch

State v. Welch’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 2014
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · State v. Spreigl · State v. Morris · State v. Crocker · State v. Grossman

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

  1. “We believe that confinement or removal must be criminally significant in the sense of being more than merely incidental to the underlying crime, in order to justify a separate criminal sentence. Under our current sentencing scheme, convictions that solely rely on acts incidental to the commission of one crime— here confining [the victim] in the course of murder — to constitute the elements of kidnapping (confinement) unduly exaggerate the criminality of the conduct. We conclude that where the confinement or removal of the victim is completely incidental to the perpetration of a separate felony, it does not constitute kidnapping.”
    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.