Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 Wis. 2d 352 - State v. Unnamed

150 Wis. 2d 352 - State v. Unnamed’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably 167 Wis. 2d 749 - State v. Borrell (1992), 226 Wis. 2d 637 - State v. Horn (1999)

45 state decisions

25019891990200020102020decided

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 Morrison v. Olson · Borgnis v. Falk Co. · 106 Wis. 2d 31 - State v. Holmes · 42 Wis. 2d 368 - State Ex Rel. Kurkierewicz v. Cannon · Brown v. Multnomah County District Court

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

  1. “one branch of government may exercise power conferred on another only to an extent that does not unduly burden or substantially interfere with the other branch's role and powers.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If a district attorney refuses or is unavailable to issue a complaint, a circuit judge may permit the filing of a complaint, if the judge finds there is probable cause to believe that the person to be charged has committed an offense after conducting a hearing. If the district attorney has refused to issue a complaint, he or she shall be informed of the hearing and may attend. The hearing shall be ex parte without the right of cross-examination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] John Doe proceeding is intended as an investigatory tool used to ascertain whether a crime has been committed and if so, by whom.”
    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.