State v. Long’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2022
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 Apprendi v. New Jersey · Taylor v. United States · Shepard v. United States · 153 Wis. 2d 493 - State v. Poellinger · 162 Wis. 2d 883 - State v. Martin
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“may not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact unless the evidence, viewed most favorably to the [S]tate and the conviction, is so lacking in probative value and force that no trier of fact, acting reasonably, could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“give deference to the jury's determination and view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“in the context in which it is used; not in isolation but as part of a whole; in relation to the language of surrounding closely-related statutes; and reasonably, to avoid absurd or unreasonable results.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.