State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “there must be objective evidence that a prosecutor acted in order to punish the defendant for standing on his legal rights.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cameron · State v. Tkacz

2. “the basic principle that it is a violation of due process when the state retaliates against a person for exercising a protected statutory or constitutional right.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 385 Wis. 2d 210 - State v. Trattner · State v. Tkacz

3. “In order to decide whether a prosecutor's decision to bring additional charges constituted prosecutorial vindictiveness in violation of the defendant's due process rights, we first must determine whether a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness exists; if indeed it does exist, then a rebuttable presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness applies. If we conclude that no presumption of vindictiveness applies, we next must determine whether the defendant has established actual prosecutorial vindictiveness.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 276 Wis. 2d 863 - State v. Slinker