Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Alexander v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1994Austin held that in considering the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, the question is not whether a forfeiture or fine "is civil or criminal, but rather whether it is punishment." Id. at 497-498 ; see also Alexander v. United States, 125 L.Ed.2d 441, 455-456 (discussing and remanding for Eighth Amendment analysis regarding in personam criminal forfeiture). 1994Austin held that in considering the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, the question is not whether a forfeiture or fine "is civil or criminal, but rather whether it is punishment." Id. at 497-498 ; see also Alexander v. United States, 125 L.Ed.2d 441, 455-456 (discussing and remanding for Eighth Amendment analysis regarding in personam criminal forfeiture). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Allengreen2 sentences2018See State v. Allen , 2004 WI 106 , ¶23, 274 Wis. 2d 568 , 682 N.W.2d 433 (a post-conviction motion must include "sufficient material facts for reviewing courts to meaningfully assess a defendant's claim"). 2018See State v. Allen , 2004 WI 106 , ¶23, 274 Wis. 2d 568 , 682 N.W.2d 433 (a post-conviction motion must include "sufficient material facts for reviewing courts to meaningfully assess a defendant's claim"). | 1 | 1 |
Hudson v. McMilliangreen2 sentences2011See Hudson, 503 U.S. at 7 (noting factual inquiries that may be relevant when excessive force is claimed). ¶ 54. 2011See Hudson, 503 U.S. at 7 (noting factual inquiries that may be relevant when excessive force is claimed). ¶ 54. | 1 | 1 |
O'Malley, Robert C. v. Litscher, Jon E.green2 sentences2011McAleese , 770 E Supp. at 258; see also O'Malley, 465 F.3d at 805-06 (recognizing that pain or injury resulting from being in a restraint chair for forced feeding could constitute an "objectively serious medical condition," but rejecting the Eighth Amendment claim because of an absence of deliberate indifference to that condition). 2011McAleese , 770 E Supp. at 258; see also O'Malley, 465 F.3d at 805-06 (recognizing that pain or injury resulting from being in a restraint chair for forced feeding could constitute an "objectively serious medical condition," but rejecting the Eighth Amendment claim because of an absence of deliberate indifference to that condition). | 1 | 1 |
Al-Adahi v. Obamagreen2 sentences2011See Al-Adahi v. Obama, 596 F. Supp. 2d 111, 120-21 (D.D.C. 2009) (use of restraint chair to force feed an inmate is not an Eighth Amendment violation when it is medically necessary to preserve the inmate's life). ¶ 52. 2011See Al-Adahi v. Obama, 596 F. Supp. 2d 111, 120-21 (D.D.C. 2009) (use of restraint chair to force feed an inmate is not an Eighth Amendment violation when it is medically necessary to preserve the inmate's life). ¶ 52. | 1 | 1 |
Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. Romeogreen2 sentences2011See Youngberg, 457 U.S. at 323 n.30 (explaining what the court there means by "professional" decisionmaker); see also Wells, 111 F.2d at 1262 (explaining what decisions involving restraint are appropriate for a psychiatrist and what are appropriate for a nurse). 2011See Youngberg, 457 U.S. at 323 n.30 (explaining what the court there means by "professional" decisionmaker); see also Wells, 111 F.2d at 1262 (explaining what decisions involving restraint are appropriate for a psychiatrist and what are appropriate for a nurse). | 1 | 1 |
cluster 559537green2 sentences2004The defendants assert, and we acknowledge, that disparate holdings among U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal may well be "indicative of the fact that.. . rights in this regard are currently unsettled as a matter of constitutional law and therefore were not 'clearly established.'" Upton v. Thompson, 930 F.2d 1209, 1217 (7th Cir. 1991). 2004The defendants assert, and we acknowledge, that disparate holdings among U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal may well be "indicative of the fact that.. . rights in this regard are currently unsettled as a matter of constitutional law and therefore were not 'clearly established.'" Upton v. Thompson, 930 F.2d 1209, 1217 (7th Cir. 1991). | 1 | 1 |
Anderson v. Creightongreen2 sentences2004The Supreme Court has explained that it is not necessary, in order to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, to show that "the very action in question has previously been held unlawful; but that in the light of pre-existing law the unlawfulness must be apparent." Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 (1987). 2004The Supreme Court has explained that it is not necessary, in order to defeat a claim of qualified immunity, to show that "the very action in question has previously been held unlawful; but that in the light of pre-existing law the unlawfulness must be apparent." Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
Hoptowit v. Raygreen2 sentences2003See, e.g., Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1246 (9th Cir. 1982) (" 'An institution's obligation under the eighth amendment is at an end if it furnishes sentenced prisoners with adequate food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, medical care, and personal safety.") (Citations omitted.) Equal Protection ¶ 9. 2003See, e.g., Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1246 (9th Cir. 1982) (" 'An institution's obligation under the eighth amendment is at an end if it furnishes sentenced prisoners with adequate food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, medical care, and personal safety.") (Citations omitted.) Equal Protection ¶ 9. | 1 | 1 |
Farmer v. Brennangreen2 sentences2001See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 835-38 (1994) (concluding that "deliberate indifference" requires "a state of mind more blameworthy than negligence," and something more than "civil-law" or "objective" recklessness: "an official's failure to alleviate a significant risk that he should have perceived but did not, while no cause for commendation, cannot under our cases be condemned as the infliction of punishment."). ¶ 14. 2001See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 835-38 (1994) (concluding that "deliberate indifference" requires "a state of mind more blameworthy than negligence," and something more than "civil-law" or "objective" recklessness: "an official's failure to alleviate a significant risk that he should have perceived but did not, while no cause for commendation, cannot under our cases be condemned as the infliction of punishment."). ¶ 14. | 1 | 1 |
Jane Peckham v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections, Patrick J. Fiedler, Terri Landwehr, Kristine Krenke, and Bradley Gehringgreen2 sentences1999See Peckham v. Wisconsin Dep't of Corrections, 141 F.3d 694, 695 (7th Cir. 1998). 1999See Peckham v. Wisconsin Dep't of Corrections, 141 F.3d 694, 695 (7th Cir. 1998). | 1 | 1 |
Whitley v. Albersgreen1 sentence1999In order to prevail on his Eighth Amendment claim, Casteel must show that the defendants, by subjecting him to strip searches at the times and under the circumstances before us, caused "the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.'" See Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 319 (1986) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Hudson v. Palmergreen1 sentence1999See, e.g., Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 525, 530 (1984) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Lynchgreen2 sentences1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kriegergreen2 sentences1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Michelsgreen2 sentences1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 1997See Michels, 150 Wis. 2d at 95, 100 , 441 N.W.2d at 279, 281 ("worsening health is not a new factor entitling [defendant] to resentencing"; "worsening of [defendant]'s health does not frustrate the sentencing judge's original intent"); cf. State v. Krieger, 163 Wis. 2d 241, 259-260 , 471 N.W.2d 599, 606 (Ct. App. 1991) (Adverse conditions of confinement, even where they may constitute an Eighth-Amendment violation, do not entitle prisoner "to a modification of his sentence, but only to corrective measures directed to changing the conditions of confinement."); State v. Lynch, 105 Wis. 2d 164, 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Austin v. United States
green
2 sentences1994Austin held that in considering the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, the question is not whether a forfeiture or fine "is civil or criminal, but rather whether it is punishment." Id. at 497-498 ; see also Alexander v. United States, 125 L.Ed.2d 441, 455-456 (discussing and remanding for Eighth Amendment analysis regarding in personam criminal forfeiture). 1994Austin held that in considering the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, the question is not whether a forfeiture or fine "is civil or criminal, but rather whether it is punishment." Id. at 497-498 ; see also Alexander v. United States, 125 L.Ed.2d 441, 455-456 (discussing and remanding for Eighth Amendment analysis regarding in personam criminal forfeiture). | 2 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Barbeau
green
2 sentences2026State v. Barbeau, 2016 WI App 51, ¶27 , 370 Wis. 2d 736 , 883 N.W.2d 520 . 7 Section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code reads, in pertinent part: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State … subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law[.] All references to the United States Code are to the online register 2026State v. Barbeau, 2016 WI App 51, ¶27 , 370 Wis. 2d 736 , 883 N.W.2d 520 . 7 Section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code reads, in pertinent part: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State … subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law[.] All references to the United States Code are to the online register | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Bollig
green
2 sentences2021We further determine that we are bound by our supreme court’s decision in State v. Bollig, 2000 WI 6 , 232 Wis. 2d 561 , 605 N.W.2d 199 , that no Eighth Amendment violation occurs based upon the registry’s prohibition against name changes. 2021We further determine that we are bound by our supreme court’s decision in State v. Bollig, 2000 WI 6 , 232 Wis. 2d 561 , 605 N.W.2d 199 , that no Eighth Amendment violation occurs based upon the registry’s prohibition against name changes. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Powell v. Texas
green
1 sentence2020He tacitly acknowledges clarifying language in Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968), but he asserts that the Powell plurality opinion, if read in conjunction with the concurrence and with Robinson, supports his claim “that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the state from punishing an involuntary act which is the unavoidable consequence of one’s status.” 11 If Winfield presented his Eighth Amendment claim to the circuit court, he has not directed our attention to the place in the record where he did so. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Caban
green
2 sentences2020“The party raising [a constitutional] issue on appeal has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the issue was raised before the circuit court.” State v. Caban, 210 Wis. 2d 597, 604 , 563 N.W.2d 501 (1997). 2020“The party raising [a constitutional] issue on appeal has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the issue was raised before the circuit court.” State v. Caban, 210 Wis. 2d 597, 604 , 563 N.W.2d 501 (1997). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Huebner
green
2 sentences2020In fact, Winfield failed to raise his Eighth Amendment challenge in the circuit court at any time.11 “Issues that are not preserved at the circuit court, even alleged constitutional errors, generally will not be considered on appeal.” State v. Huebner, 2000 WI 59, ¶10 , 235 Wis. 2d 486 , 611 N.W.2d 727 . 2020In fact, Winfield failed to raise his Eighth Amendment challenge in the circuit court at any time.11 “Issues that are not preserved at the circuit court, even alleged constitutional errors, generally will not be considered on appeal.” State v. Huebner, 2000 WI 59, ¶10 , 235 Wis. 2d 486 , 611 N.W.2d 727 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Pratt
green
2 sentences2005In addressing the Eighth Amendment claim, we look to whether the sentence was "so excessive and unusual, and so disproportionate to the offense committed, as to shock public *131 sentiment and violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what is right and proper under the circumstances." State v. Pratt, 36 Wis. 2d 312, 322 , 153 N.W.2d 18 (1967) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). 2005In addressing the Eighth Amendment claim, we look to whether the sentence was "so excessive and unusual, and so disproportionate to the offense committed, as to shock public *131 sentiment and violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what is right and proper under the circumstances." State v. Pratt, 36 Wis. 2d 312, 322 , 153 N.W.2d 18 (1967) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
City of Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital
green
2 sentences2000City of Revere, 463 U.S. at 244 . 2000City of Revere, 463 U.S. at 244 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.