159 Wis. 2d 1 - State v. Rewolinski’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably 190 Wis. 2d 31 - State v. Flynn (1994), 223 Wis. 2d 331 - State v. Armstrong (1999)
64 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 Chapman v. State of California · Katz v. United States · Rakas v. Illinois · Hudson v. Palmer · United States v. Matlock
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether the defendant had a property interest in the premises; (2) whether he [or she] was legitimately (lawfully) on the premises; (3) whether he [or she] had complete dominion and control and the right to exclude others; (4) whether he [or she] took precautions customarily taken by those seeking privacy; (5) whether he [or she] put the property to some private use; and (6) whether the claim of privacy is consistent with historical notions of privacy.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“The determination of whether the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy depends on two separate questions. The first question is whether the individual by his conduct exhibited an actual, subjective expectation of privacy. The second question is whether such an expectation is legitimate or justifiable in that it is one that society is willing to recognize as reasonable.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“depends, in the first place, on whether the defendant had a legitimate, justifiable or reasonable expectation of privacy that was invaded by the government action.”
2 later decisions 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.