Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 Wis. 2d 788 - State v. Shillcutt

119 Wis. 2d 788 - State v. Shillcutt’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
3
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 124 Wis. 2d 681 - State v. Wyss (1985), 190 Wis. 2d 31 - State v. Flynn (1994)

2 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

4601984199020002010decided

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 Patterson v. United States · Bullock v. United States · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Newman Oil Co. · United States v. Radio Television News Directors Ass'n · Clark v. United States

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

  1. “existing or originating outside or beyond: external in origin: coming from the outside”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 185 Wis. 2d 254 - State v. Messelt · 194 Wis. 2d 160 - State v. Eison
  2. “on the question [of] whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 190 Wis. 2d 31 - State v. Flynn · 172 Wis. 2d 491 - State v. Marhal
  3. “knowledge of a particular event or situation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 196 Wis. 2d 218 - State v. Heitkemper · 2006 WI App 50 - Manke v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, Inc.

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.