Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 28 WIS2D 126 - State v. Schmear

State v. Schmear’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
2
states following
June 2004
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently June 2004 · most notably 168 Wis. 2d 915 - State v. Comstock (1992), 61 Wis. 2d 297 - State v. Bagnall (1973)

3 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

32019651970198019902000decided

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 Green v. United States · Palko v. State of Connecticut · Bartkus v. People of State of Illinois · Bryan v. United States · LundBerg v. Bannan

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

  1. ““. . . This theory contemplates one legal trial and there is but one continuing jeopardy until the defendant has had a valid trial free from reversible error for the offense charged. The defendant is entitled to be legally convicted or acquitted and until that stage is reached continuity of the jeopardy exists. The second trial because of error or invalidity of the first trial is but the continuation in legal contemplation of the criminal proceeding and there is no second or double jeopardy. . . . It is immaterial whether the new trial is granted on the motion of the defendant or on the court’s motion or •whether the reason is merely irregularity or invalidity of the proceedings. . . .” 10”
    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.