127 Wis. 2d 247 - State v. Fishnick’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

cited by 99 later decisions

states following

June 2022

most recently cited

95 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 99 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably 216 Wis. 2d 768 - State v. Sullivan (1998), 160 Wis. 2d 722 - State v. Kuntz (1991)

95 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 Strickland v. Washington · 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess · 115 Wis. 2d 334 - State v. Pharr · 34 Wis. 2d 278 - Whitty v. State · 108 Wis. 2d 723 - State v. Alsteen

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

“such a concurrence of common features and so many points of similarity with the crime charged that it 'can reasonably be said that the other acts and the present act constitute the imprint of the defendant.'”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. 384 Wis. 2d 270 - State v. Price · 227 Wis. 2d 285 - State v. Scheidell
“Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time. Although relevant, evidence maybe excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
e.g. 184 Wis. 2d 324 - State v. Johnson · 135 Wis. 2d 1 - State v. Friedrich
“904.04 Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes. ... (2) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. This subsection does not exclude the evidence when offered for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 176 Wis. 2d 1101 - State v. Speer · 222 Wis. 2d 233 - State v. Davidson

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.