129 Wis. 2d 394 - State v. Edelburg’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
October 2005
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Allen v. United States · 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess · Bradley v. State · 51 Wis. 2d 641 - Kelley 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“All jury trials involve the possibility of a juror agreeing to a majority viewpoint for reasons extraneous to the facts of the case. Merely telling a juror that her jury duties are primary does not assure that the juror will not agree to a verdict out of personal concerns. The trial judge could do nothing about the business commitment, nor the juror's private reaction to the commitment. No one can know whether a juror has compromised his or her oath unless the juror reveals that fact. Here, the judge did what he could — he gave an extra hour for deliberation. We conclude that there was no coercion sufficient to deny Edelburg a fair trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[flailure to object to an error at trial generally precludes a defendant from raising the issue on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The waiver doctrine applies even to the claim of a constitutional right”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Anderson
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.