Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 203 Wis. 2d 288 - State v. Smith

203 Wis. 2d 288 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2012

22 state decisions

120199620002010decided

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 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 124 Wis. 2d 525 - State v. Dyess · 39 Wis. 2d 754 - State v. Hutnik · 160 Wis. 2d 722 - State v. Kuntz · 201 Wis. 2d 219 - State v. Sanchez

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

  1. “The assumption is that the longer the criminal record, the less credible the individual.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) General rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime or adjudicated delinquent is admissible. The party cross-examining the witness is not concluded by the witness's answer. (2) Exclusion. Evidence of a conviction of a crime or an adjudication of delinquency may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. (3) Admissibility of conviction or adjudication. No question inquiring with respect to a conviction of a crime or an adjudication of delinquency, nor introduction of evidence with respect thereto, shall be permitted until the judge determines pursuant to s. 901.04 whether the evidence should be excluded. [ 4 ]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The crimes need not have any relevance to a person's character for truthfulness[, and] it is not necessary to directly link the nature of the offense with the character trait for truthfulness; the link is provided by the fact of conviction [because] Wisconsin law ... embodies the idea that persons who have been convicted of crimes are as a class less worthy of belief than those who have no criminal record.”
    1 later decision 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.