108 Wis. 2d 291 - State v. Lehman’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably 214 Ill. 2d 106 - People v. Roberts (2005), Peek v. Kemp (1986)
2 federal appellate · 45 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Williams v. Florida · Apodaca v. Oregon · Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba · United States v. Phillips
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Such inquiry [into the substance of the discharge request] generally should be made out of the presence of the jurors and in the presence of all counsel and the defendant.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a]ny time there is substitution of a juror after jury deliberations have begun, the same twelve jurors have not participated in the entire deliberative process. Two essential features of the right to trial by jury ... are that the jury be composed of twelve persons and that the jury reach a unanimous verdict. Twelve people must have the opportunity to review the evidence in light of each juror’s perception, memory and reaction and to reach their consensus through deliberations which are the common experience of all of them. Each of the twelve must have the opportunity to persuade the other members of the jury and to be persuaded by them.... If, during deliberations, a juror is discharged and another substituted, the eleven regular jurors will have had the benefit of the views of the discharged juror while the alternate will not. The eleven regular jurors will have formed views without the benefit of the views of the alternate juror, and the alternate juror who is unfamiliar with the prior deliberations will participate without the benefit of the pri- or group discussion. If deliberations have progressed to the point where the eleven regular jurors are in substantial agreement, the alternate juror may find it difficult to persuade and convince the eleven who have already come to an understanding.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“decline[d] to infer from a silent statute that the legislature approves substitution during jury deliberations,” and has proceeded,”
3 later decisions 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.