Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 715 P2D 1174 - Dancer v. State

Dancer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably Drumbarger v. State (1986), Kirby v. State (1987)

28 state decisions

901986199020002010decided

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 Solem v. Helm · Carstea v. Poplar Tree Homeowners Ass'n · United States v. Monton · McClain v. State · State v. Chaney

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

  1. “The three-judge panel’s authority to establish new aggravating and mitigating factors constitutes a legislative recognition of the court’s common law power to develop the law subject to legislative and constitutional limitations. See AS 01.10.010. Of course, any common law decision establishing a new aggravating or mitigating factor is subject to reconsideration by the legislature. It is unlikely that the panel would accept a new factor if that factor had already been expressly considered and rejected by the legislature. Cf. AS 12.55.155(g) (voluntary alcohol or drug intoxication or chronic alcoholism or other drug addiction may not be considered an aggravating or mitigating factor).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “The minutes of the constitutional convention discussing this provision do not specifically address the question of parole. Dancer points out that the drafters did address the governor’s clemency power during their deliberations and apparently intended to prevent secret pardons and commutations by making the governor’s powers subject to the legislative procedures. See 3 Proceedings of the Alaska Constitutional Convention, at 2190-91 (1956). 715 P.2d 1174, 1182 (AlaskaCtApp 1986).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “We may not concern ourselves with the wisdom of legislation. Our role is much more modest. We evaluate the legislation to determine whether it contravenes any prohibitions in the constitution. If it does not, we must uphold the legislation. Policy arguments advocating changes to constitutional legislation must be addressed to the legislature, not the courts.”
    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.