123 Wis. 2d 1 - State v. Richards’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 162 Wis. 2d 883 - State v. Martin (1991), 162 Wis. 2d 737 - Voss v. City of Middleton (1991)
43 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 100 Wis. 2d 452 - Hagenkord v. State · 33 Wis. 2d 373 - Commodore v. State · 83 Wis. 2d 630 - Randolph v. State · 83 Wis. 2d 647 - State v. Verhasselt · 99 Wis. 2d 673 - Hawthorne 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Simple Battery] (1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. [Intermediate Battery] (lm) Whoever causes great bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class E felony. [Aggravated Battery] (2) Whoever causes great bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause great bodily harm to that person or another with or without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class C felony. [Intermediate Battery] (3) Whoever intentionally causes bodily harm to another by conduct which creates a high probability of great bodily harm is guilty of a Class E felony. A rebuttable presumption of conduct creating a substantial risk of great bodily harm arises: (a) If the person harmed is 62 years of age or older ....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a]n included crime may be . . . [a] crime which is a less serious or equally serious type of battery than the one charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This court is committed to the “elements only” analysis of whether one offense is included within another. The test focuses not on the peculiar factual nature of a given defendant’s criminal activity, but on whether the lesser offense is statutorily within the greater.... Stated in other words, an offense is a “lesser included” one only if all of its statutory elements can be demonstrated without proof of any fact or element in addition to those which must be proved for the “greater” offense .... Conversely, an offense is not a lesser-included one if it contains an additional statutory element. This court has stated this test often and clearly. Randolph v. State, 83 Wis.2d 630 , 266 N.W.2d 334 (1978); State v. Verhasselt, 83 Wis.2d 647 , 266 N.W.2d 342 (1978); and State v. Smith, 55 Wis.2d 304, 310 , 198 N.W.2d 630 (1972). In Randolph , the court additionally capsulized the rule by the formulation that “for one crime to be included in another, it must be ‘utterly impossible’ to commit the greater crime without committing the lesser.””
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.