76 Wis. 2d 277 - Cunningham v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably 217 Wis. 2d 392 - State v. Lechner (1998), Maurin v. Hall (2004)
46 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 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 39 Wis. 2d 754 - State v. Hutnik · 70 Wis. 2d 179 - Ocanas v. State · 70 Wis. 2d 280 - Rosado v. State · 44 Wis. 2d 454 - Cheney 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[g]iving consideration to various relevant factors ... involve[s] a weighing and balancing operation, but the weight to be given to a particular factor in a particular case is for the trial court, not this court, to determine.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“impose as many sentences as there are convictions and [to] provide that any such sentence be concurrent with or consecutive to any other sentence imposed at the same time or previously.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““. . . all an appellate court can ask of a trial judge is that he state the facts on which he predicates his judgment, and that he give the reasons, for his conclusion. If the facts are fairly inferable from the record, and the reasons indicate the consideration of legally relevant factors, the sentence should ordinarily be affirmed. If there is evidence that discretion was properly exercised, and the sentence imposed was the product of that discretion, the trial judge fully complies with the standard.” Id. at 281 .”
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.