Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 7 P.3d 49 - Segnitz v. State

Segnitz v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hamill v. State · Smith 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The district court's decision is given considerable deference unless a rational basis does not exist for it. A criminal defendant is entitled to receive credit against his sentence for the time he was incarcerated prior to sentencing, provided that such confinement was because of his inability and failure to post bond on the offense for which he was awaiting disposition. A sentence which does not include credit for presentence incarceration is illegal and constitutes an abuse of discretion. A defendant is not, however, entitled to eredit for the time he spent in custody when that confinement would have continued despite his ability to post bond.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[ilf a defendant is subject to prosecution in more than one court, the decision regarding how the sentences will run with respect to one another should be made by the last judge to impose a sentence. The underlying rationale for this theory is that a judge cannot require a sentence to be served consecutively to a sentence that has not yet been imposed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The decision to grant or deny a motion to correct an illegal sentence is usually left to the sound discretion of the district court.”
    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.