Kaess v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 2012
17 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 United States v. DiFrancesco · Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation · Martin v. State · Arnold v. State · Jones Land & Livestock Co. v. Federal Land Bank of Omaha
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Cursory consideration of the misdemeanor [and now felony] cost assessment statute was given in Johnson v. State, 532 P.2d 598 (Wyo. 1975), where this court determined that (1) jury and bailiff expenses could not be taxed as costs, and (2) the expense of expert medical witnesses could only be charged at the statutory rate of $25. That decision left open the possibility of additional payments for three further witnesses. The tenor of the case was to follow the standards applicable to civil cases. * * * Until the legislature provides some statutory differentiation, or this court adopts special provisions within the rules of criminal procedure, general standards as applicable to costs in civil cases will be applied, including witness fees, service fees, and fees for depositions when actually used, since no basis exists for differentiating assessable costs in civil and criminal cases. See Rule 54(d), W.R.C.P.; Rule 1, W.R.C.P.; Rule 20(a), W.R. Cr.P. Certain principles, as well as problems, can be extrapolated from the Wyoming criminal and civil cost-assessment cases. (a) Costs may only be assessed as statutorily authorized. * * * The civil costs statute, § 1-14-124, W.S. 1977, affords no itemization detail, nor does any procedural rule. Even in the civil cases, what may be assessed as costs against the loser is "not very clearly established by either statute or rule," * * *. (b) The standard generally applied is the amount statutorily allowed for witness fees and travel expenses ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Seaton v. State“To be repetitive, the subjects of costs of prosecution and defense, which are confused structurally and constitutionally, may deserve consideration by the legislature, and by in-strumentalities of the judiciary such as the rules advisory committee under the mandate of § 5-2-117, W.S. 1977.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Seaton v. State“Payment of the costs of prosecution may be added to and made a part of the sentence in any felony or misdemeanor case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Seaton 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.