Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 134 WIS 307 - Jennings v. State

Jennings v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1908

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
January 2002
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2002

17 state decisions

4019081910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Bank of Columbia v. Okely · Emery v. State · Mauch v. City of Hartford · Bennett v. State · Cornell 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[i]f it is deemed good public policy to extend the privilege of waiving a jury in criminal cases, such policy should find expression in appropriate legislative action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ It seems necessarily to follow that if a person on trial in a criminal case has no power to waive a jury he has no right to be tried by a less number than a common-law jury of twelve, and when he puts himself on the country it requires a jury of twelve to comply with the demands of the constitution. The fact that the jury in the instant case had the required number of twelve up to the stage in the trial when the cause was to be submitted to them under the instructions of the court cannot operate to satisfy the constitutional demand. At this point the trial was incomplete, for the very essential duty of having the jury deliberate upon the evidence and agree upon a verdict respecting defendant’s guilt or innocence remained unperformed. Without the verdict of a jury of twelve it cannot be said to be a verdict of the jury required by the constitution. Such a verdict is illegal and insufficient to support a judgment.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is unquestioned that a common-law jury of twelve jurors constitutes the jury contemplated by the constitution.”
    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.