170 Wis. 2d 504 - State v. Kanarowski’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “First, the court must conduct a Blockburger [elements-only] analysis. If that analysis favors the state, then the presumption is that the legislature intended to allow multiple charges for the same act. The presumption may be overcome by showing a legislative intent to the contrary.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 181 Wis. 2d 720 - State v. Akerele-Ale

2. “a clear and unequivocal statement of the legislature's intent that multiple charging under different statutory provisions is permitted where an act forms the basis for a crime under more than one statutory provision.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Moffett

3. “The constitutional protections against double jeopardy in a single prosecution are meant to prevent a single offense from being arbitrarily transformed into multiple offenses with multiple punishments.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 223 Wis. 2d 641 - State v. Church