170 Wis. 2d 393 - State v. Traylor’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

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

1. “Wisconsin's longstanding rule is that where a fair and impartial jury is impaneled, there is no basis for concluding that a defendant was wrongly required to use peremptory challenges.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 227 Wis. 2d 736 - State v. Kiernan · 211 Wis. 2d 12 - State v. Ramos

2. “a jury that included an objectionable or incompetent member”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 211 Wis. 2d 12 - State v. Ramos · 384 Wis. 2d 272 - Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. K.N.L. (In re J.B.L.)

3. “There is no constitutional right to peremptory challenges; there is only a constitutional right to an impartial jury. Ross v. Oklahoma , 487 U.S. 81 , 85, 88 (1988). Any claim that a jury is not impartial must focus not on the jurors who were removed by peremptory challenges but on the jury that actually sat in the case. See id. at 85-86 . Where there is no showing that any of the actual jurors were biased, it would be speculative for a court to conclude that the jury would have been fairer if counsel had been allowed to preserve peremptory challenges on other, unspecified members of the jury venire. Moreover, there would be no stopping point if the deprivation of such speculative benefit, standing by itself, could establish prejudice.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 384 Wis. 2d 272 - Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. K.N.L. (In re J.B.L.)