Zenou v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

59 state decisions

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

1. “"[I]f the evidence, in one reasonable view, could suffice to prove guilt of the higher degree beyond a reasonable doubt, and if, under a different, but reasonable view, the evidence would suffice to prove guilt of the lower degree beyond a reasonable doubt, but leave a reasonable doubt as to some element included in the higher degree but not in the lower, the court should, if requested, submit the lower degree as well as the higher.” Zenou v. State, 4 Wis. 2d 655, 668 , 91 N.W.2d 208 (1958).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 85 Wis. 2d 22 - Johnson v. State · 138 Wis. 2d 374 - State v. Muentner

2. ““Endangering safety by conduct regardless of life, as defined in section 941.30 of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, is committed by one who ‘. . . endangers another’s safety by conduct imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind, regardless of human life. . . .’ “Before the defendant may be found guilty of endangering safety by conduct regardless of life, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that there were present the following three elements of this offense: “First, that the defendant’s conduct was imminently dangerous to another ; “Second, that his conduct was of such a character that it evinced a depraved mind, regardless of human life; “Third, that the defendant endangered the safety of another by such conduct. “The first element of this offense requires that the defendant’s conduct was imminently dangerous to another, that is, conduct dangerous in and of itself. It must have been conduct inherently and consciously dangerous to life and not such as might casually produce death by misadventure. “The second element of this offense requires that the defendant’s conduct was of such a character that it evinced a ‘depraved mind regardless of human life.’ ‘Depraved mind regardless of human life’ does not mean that the mind of the defendant must have been diseased or that he must have had a mental disorder generally described as insanity or feeblemindedness. The depravity of mind referred to exists when the conduct endang”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. SZEGEDI · 44 Wis. 2d 68 - State v. Dolan

3. ““ ‘ “That which will constitute the ‘heat of passion’ which will reduce what would otherwise be murder to manslaughter ‘is such mental disturbance, caused by reasonable, adequate provocation, as would ordinarily so overcome and dominate or suspend the exercise of the judgment of an ordinary man as to render his mind for the time being deaf to the voice of reason; make him incapable of forming and executing that distinct intent to take human life essential to murder in the first degree; and to cause him, uncontrollably, to act from impelling force of the disturbing cause rather than from any real wickedness of heart or cruelty or recklessness of disposition. . . 11”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 51 Wis. 2d 175 - Ameen v. State