147 Wis. 2d 208 - State v. Booth’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2011
8 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 · Cupp v. Naughten · Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. · 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess · Mucci v. United States
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.
“respond ... with sufficient specificity to clarify the jury's problem.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“possible prejudice to a defendant is presumptively erased from the jury's collective mind when admonitory instructions have been properly given by the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a properly given admonitory instruction [will be] followed.”
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.