174 Wis. 2d 231 - State v. Richer’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably 175 Wis. 2d 684 - State v. Koch (1993), 198 Wis. 2d 516 - State v. Williams (1996)
26 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 Bruton v. United States · 34 Wis. 2d 278 - Whitty v. State · 150 Wis. 2d 688 - State v. Blalock · 121 Wis. 2d 389 - State v. Dunn · 65 Wis. 2d 331 - Bailey v. State
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“so long as they are not wholly unrelated to the transactions or facts considered or testified to at the preliminary.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. White · State v. Bury“971.01 Filing of the information. (1) The district attorney shall examine all facts and circumstances connected with any preliminary examination touching the commission of any crime if the defendant has been bound over for trial and, subject to s. 970.03 (10), shall file an information according to the evidence on such examination subscribing his or her name thereto. (2) The information shall be filed with the clerk within 30 days after the completion of the preliminary examination or waiver thereof except that the district attorney may move the court wherein the information is to be filed for an order extending the period for filing such information for cause. Notice of such motion shall be given the defendant. Failure to file the information within such time shall entitle the defendant to have the action dismissed without prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[To protect the] defendant's due process rights and guard [s] against undue deprivations of the defendant's liberty ... 'to prevent hasty, malicious, improvident and oppressive prosecutions, to protect the person charged from open and public accusations of crime, to avoid both for the defendant and the public the expense of a public trial, and to save the defendant from the humiliation and anxiety involved in public prosecution, and to discover whether or not there are substantial grounds upon which a prosecution may be based.'”
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.