Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 Wis. 2d 359 - State v. Friday

147 Wis. 2d 359 - State v. Friday’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 185 Wis. 2d 220 - Stern v. Thompson & Coates, Ltd. (1994), Blum ex rel. Studinski v. 1st Auto & Casualty Insurance (2010)

62 state decisions

3601989199020002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Place · United States v. Jacobsen · 50 Wis. 2d 619 - State v. Paszek

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

  1. “[t]he drawing of an inference on undisputed facts when more than one inference is possible is a finding of fact which is binding upon an appellate court. It is not within the province of this court or any appellate court to choose not to accept an inference drawn by a factfinder when the inference drawn is a reasonable one.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall , not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The fact that one has once been a police informant does not for all time so categorize the person or relegate the person to that status if in a particular case he is more than a mere “tipster,” but rather is one who is known to be so situated as to acquire and relay reliable information.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.