State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
March 2003
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Neder v. United States · State v. Harvey · State v. Williams · 176 Wis. 2d 542 - State v. Patricia A. M. · 156 Wis. 2d 783 - State v. Rognrud
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[tjhere is nothing in Harvey to suggest that this language constitutes a substantive change in Wisconsin's harmless error test. The court's prior articulation of the test was frequently summarized as follows: "whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction. A reasonable possibility is a possibility sufficient to undermine our confidence in the conviction." State v. Williams, 2002 WI 58, ¶ 50 , 253 Wis. 2d 99 , 644 N.W.2d 919 (citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gary M. B.“'clear beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found the defendant guilty absent the error.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gary M. B.
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.