167 Wis. 2d 672 - State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
82 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably 190 Wis. 2d 31 - State v. Flynn (1994), State v. Arias (2008)
82 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Rhode Island v. Innis · New York v. Belton · In re Kauffman Mutual Fund Actions
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he quantum of evidence must constitute 'more than a possibility or suspicion that defendant committed an offense, but the evidence need not reach the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt or even that guilt is more likely than not. The information which constitutes probable cause is measured by the facts of the particular case.'”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Based on the presence of both the odor of marijuana and the smoke, Officer Smith had reason to believe that defendant, his passenger, or both had been smoking marijuana, and thus possessing marijuana. The fact that there were two occupants in the vehicle is not fatal to a finding of probable cause to arrest defendant because probable cause does not mandate that it is more likely than not that the defendant committed the offense. We hold that, based on the marijuana odor and smoke inside the vehicle, Officer Smith had probable cause to arrest defendant and therefore the arrest was lawful."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“The 'great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence' standard is basically a 'clearly erroneous' standard.”
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.