161 Wis. 2d 140 - State v. Oliver’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2017
12 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 Idaho v. Wright · 143 Wis. 2d 226 - State v. Sorenson · 110 Wis. 2d 414 - State v. Padilla · 106 Wis. 2d 624 - State Ex Rel. Funmaker v. Klamm · 157 Wis. 2d 55 - State v. Robles
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Third, the court should review the circumstances under which the statement was made, including relation to the time of the alleged assault, the availability of a person in whom the child might confide, and other contextual factors which might enhance or detract from the statement's trustworthiness.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Second, the court should examine the person to whom the statement was made, focusing on the person's relationship to the child, whether that relationship might have an impact upon the statement's trustworthiness, and any motivation of the recipient of the statement to fabricate or distort its contents. Id. at 245. ¶ 25. LeAnn told both her mother and Officer Lehnert that Simpson had sexually assaulted her. In neither case was LeAnn prompted to specifically identify Simpson, yet she did in both conversations. Because”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“First, the attributes of the child making the statement should be examined, including age, ability to communicate verbally, to comprehend the statements or questions of others, to know the difference between truth and falsehood, and any fear of punishment, retribution or other personal interest, such as close familial relationship with the defendant, expressed by the child which might affect the child's method of articulation or motivation to tell the truth.”
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.