Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 WI 71 - State v. Stevenson

State v. Stevenson’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2020

21 state decisions

150200020102020decided

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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Hamling v. United States · Dombrowski v. Pfister · New York v. Ferber · Thornhill v. Alabama

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

  1. “[t]ak[ing] a photograph or mak[ing] a motion picture, videotape or other visual representation or reproduction that depicts nudity without the knowledge and consent of the person who is depicted nude . . . .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he statute not only properly prohibits Stevenson's surreptitious videotaping of his former girlfriend in the nude, but also improperly prohibits all visual expression of nudity without explicit consent, including political satire and newsworthy images. Wisconsin Stat. § 944.205(2)(a) does not limit its reach to original depictions of nudity but rather overreaches to all reproductions. It chills the ability to include copies of masterpieces like Michaelangelo's "David" in a book devoted to famous sculptures and also prevents the dissemination of materials that may portray nudity for health or educational purposes.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(2) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a Class E felony: (a) Takes a photograph or makes a motion picture, videotape or other visual representation or reproduction that depicts nudity without the knowledge and consent of the person who is depicted nude, if the person knows or has reason to know that the person who is depicted nude does not know of and consent to the taking or making of the photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual representation or reproduction.”
    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.