Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 Wis. 2d 424 - State v. Evers

139 Wis. 2d 424 - State v. Evers’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
3
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably 216 Wis. 2d 768 - State v. Sullivan (1998), 161 Ohio St. 3d 214 - State v. Hartman (Slip Opinion) (2020)

41 state decisions

24019871990200020102020decided

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 Desist v. United States · 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess · 34 Wis. 2d 278 - Whitty v. State · 39 Wis. 2d 754 - State v. Hutnik

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

  1. “'[T]he oftener a like act has been done, the less probable it is that it could have been done innocently.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]f a like occurrence takes place enough times, it can no longer be attributed to mere coincidence. Innocent intent will become improbable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The character rule excluding prior-crimes evidence as it relates to the guilt issue rests on four bases: (1) The overstrong tendency to believe the defendant guilty of the charge merely because he is a person likely to do such acts; (2) the tendency to condemn not because he is believed guilty of the present charge, but because he has escaped punishment from other offenses; (3) the injustice of attacking one who is not prepared to demonstrate the attacking evidence is fabricated; and (4) the confusion of issues which might result from bringing in evidence of other crimes.”
    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.