State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably State v. Cole (2003), Columbia Propane, L.P. v. Wisconsin Gas Co. (2003)
34 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 165 Wis. 2d 585 - Burkes v. Hales · 222 Wis. 2d 627 - Hull v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · 98 Wis. 2d 569 - State v. Braunsdorf · 107 Wis. 2d 492 - Dixon v. Dixon · 20 Wis. 2d 504 - State Ex Rel. Fredenberg v. Byrne
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Whenever the warden or superintendent receives notice of an untried criminal case pending in this state against an inmate of a state prison, the warden or superintendent shall, at the request of the inmate, send by certified mail a written request to the district attorney for prompt disposition of the case .... (2) If the crime charged is a felony, the district attorney shall either move to dismiss the pending case or arrange a date for preliminary examination as soon as convenient and notify the warden or superintendent of the prison thereof, unless such examination has already been held or has been waived .... The district attorney shall bring the case on for trial within 120 days after receipt of the request subject to s. 971.10. (7) If the district attorney moves to dismiss any pending case or if it is not brought on for trial within the time specified in sub. (2)... the case shall be dismissed unless the defendant has escaped or otherwise prevented the trial, in which case the request for disposition of the case shall be deemed withdrawn and of no further legal effect. (Emphasis added.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. Whether the failure to grant the continuance in the proceeding would be likely to make a continuation of the proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice. 2. Whether the case taken as a whole is so unusual and so complex, due to the number of defendants or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time established by this section. 3. The interests of the victim, as defined in [Wis. Stat. §] 950.02(4).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Butler“A court may grant a continuance in a case, upon its own motion or the motion of any party, if the ends of justice served by taking action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Butler
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.