Wilson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2013
8 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 Doyle v. Ohio · Anderson v. Charles · Wainwright v. Greenfield · Wilson v. State · Beanblossom 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial court's sentencing order did not purport to retain any continuing jurisdiction over Wilson. Further, as we find no statutory provision which would give the trial court jurisdiction to enhance Wilson's sentence by entering a restitution order after a sentence has already been pronounced, we hold that the trial court lacked authority to enter such an order.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. W.L. v. State · WL v. State“[wlhere a defendant is convicted of simultaneous multiple felonies and a habitual offender finding has been made, ... the particular felony conviction to which the habitual offender enhancement is attached is not relevant”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burrus v. State
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.