141 Wis. 2d 412 - State v. Larsen’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 192 Wis. 2d 674 - State v. Peters (1995), 151 Wis. 2d 488 - State v. Jones (1989)
34 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 Roviaro v. United States · McCray v. State of Illinois · 31 Wis. 2d 110 - Lock v. State · 124 Wis. 2d 681 - State v. Wyss · 119 Wis. 2d 612 - State v. Harris
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An [erroneous exercise] of discretion will be found only where the sentence is so excessive and unusual and so disproportionate to the offense committed as to shock public sentiment and violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what is right and proper under the circumstances.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“is limited to determining whether there was an [erroneous exercise] of discretion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(b) Testimony on merits. If it appears from the evidence in the case or from other showing by a party that an informer may be able to give testimony necessary to a fair determination of the issue of guilt or innocence in a criminal case [and] the... state... invokes the privilege, the judge shall give the... state ... an opportunity to show in camera facts relevant to determining whether the informer can, in fact, supply that testimony .... If the judge finds that there is a reasonable probability that the informer can give the testimony, and the ... state ... elects not to disclose the informer's identity, the judge on motion of the defendant in a criminal case shall dismiss the charges to which the testimony would relate, and the judge may do so on the judge's own motion.”
2 later decisions 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.