State v. Alfonsi’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently November 2007 · most notably 39 Wis. 2d 754 - State v. Hutnik (1968), 80 Wis. 2d 122 - State v. Mendoza (1977)
3 federal appellate · 53 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 Sheppard v. Maxwell · Boyce Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States · Parker v. Gladden · State v. Greer · State v. Foord
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the element of scienter is the rule rather than the exception in our criminal jurisprudence,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““When criminal intent is an element of a crime in the criminal code, such intent is indicated by the term ‘intentionally’, the phrase ‘with intent to’, the phrase ‘with intent that’, or some form of the verbs ‘know’ or ‘believe’.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The defendant’s attorneys did not request a change of venue, nor did they seek a continuance of the trial. Although it may be said that the defense thus waived two of the available safeguards, we note that under proper circumstances a trial court has an affirmative duty to take steps to protect the right of a defendant to a fair trial. In Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966), 384 U.S. 333, 362 , . . . the court said: “ ‘Due process requires that the accused receive a trial by an impartial jury free from outside influences. Given the pervasiveness of modern communications, and the difficulty of effacing prejudicial publicity from the minds of the jurors, the trial courts must take strong measures to ensure that the balance is never weighed against the accused.’ (Emphasis added.) “When it appears that dispassionate evaluation of the evidence is rendered doubtful because of the pressure of publicity, the trial court must act sm sponte. In the Sheppard Case, at page 363, the court observed: “ ‘. . . where there is a reasonable likelihood that prejudicial news prior to trial will prevent a fair trial, the judge should continue the case until the threat abates, or transfer it to another county not so permeated with publicity.’ ””
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.