State v. Jensen’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably State v. Robins (2002), 273 Wis. 2d 785 - State v. Yang (2004)
4 federal appellate · 20 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 153 Wis. 2d 493 - State v. Poellinger · 60 Wis. 2d 404 - State v. Weso · 73 Wis. 2d 318 - State v. Wachsmuth · 76 Wis. 2d 30 - Wagner v. State · 226 Wis. 2d 718 - State v. Bodoh
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First of all, I want to emphasize that you are to rely on the instructions that I gave you. All right? And to rely on all of the instructions that I gave you. And in response to this question, if this clarifies anything, after-the-fact regard for human life does not negate utter disregard otherwise established by the circumstances before and during the crime. It may be considered by the fact-finder as a part of the total factual picture, but it does not operate to preclude a finding of utter disregard for human life. The element of utter disregard for human life is measured objectively on the basis of what a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have known.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Burris v. Smith · State v. Burris“In conducting such an examination, we consider the type of act, its nature, why the perpetrator acted as he/she did, the extent of the victim's injuries and the degree of force that was required to cause those injuries. We also consider the type of victim, the victim's age, vulnerability, fragility, and relationship to the perpetrator. And finally, we consider whether the totality of the circumstances showed any regard for the victim's life.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Miller · State v. Burris“and not a general regard for the wellbeing and safety of those not present. Majority op., ¶31 n.16. 20 No. 2018AP2318-CR.akz utter disregard for human life, the factfinder is to consider all the factors relating to the conduct including what the defendant was doing; why he was doing it; how dangerous the conduct was; how obvious the danger was and whether the conduct showed any regard for human life.”
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.