Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 Wis. 2d 661 - State v. Billings

110 Wis. 2d 661 - State v. Billings’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess (1985), 201 Wis. 2d 219 - State v. Sanchez (1996)

44 state decisions

2001983199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Mincey v. Arizona · Harrington v. California · Harris v. New York

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

  1. “A court’s inquiry as to harmlessness does not end with its determination that the erroneously admitted evidence duplicates the untainted evidence. Regardless of the duplicative nature of the erroneously admitted evidence, the record in the particular case might reveal that the admission of the evidence was or was not prejudicial. In some eases the jury may not have been persuaded of the defendant’s guilt had it not been presented with the erroneously admitted duplicative evidence. Conversely, in other cases although the erroneously admitted evidence is not duplicative, it could be clear to the court that the evidence had no impact on the conviction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained ... and the court must be able to declare a belief that [the constitutional error] was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “a reasonable possibility that the evidence complained of might have contributed to the conviction.”
    2 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.