State v. Huber’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably United States v. Manganellis (1988), State v. Klaudt (2009)
2 federal appellate · 35 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 State v. Fox · 55 Wis. 2d 110 - Gibson v. State · State v. Nelsen · State v. Cook · Bowker v. State
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not designate an additional mental state beyond that accompanying the act.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]hether there is evidence in the record, which, if believed by- the jury, is sufficient to sustain a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (citations omitted). In making this determination, the Court will accept the evidence, and the most favorable inferences fairly drawn therefrom, which will support the verdict.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Beynon · State v. Martin“[Sjpecific intent crimes would be limited only to those crimes which are required to be committed either “purposefully” or “knowingly,” while general intent crimes would encompass those crimes which can be committed either “recklessly” or “negligently.” Thus, in order to commit a specific intent crime, an offender would have to subjectively desire or know that the prohibited result will occur, whereas in a general intent crime, the prohibited result need only be reasonably expected to follow from the offender’s voluntary act, irrespective of any subjective desire to accomplish such result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Big Head
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.