40 Wis. 2d 200 - State v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The defendant takes the position that this alibi, corroborating the defendant’s own testimony, was sufficient as a matter of law to raise a reasonable doubt of his guilt. A similar position was taken by the defendant in the case of State v. Clarke (1967), 36 Wis. 2d 268 , 277, 153 N. W. 2d 61 . In Clarke we recapitulated the cases holding that even an alibi corroborated and unimpeached and not inherently incredible was merely additional evidence to be weighed by the jury and could be disregarded if not believed by the jury. In Clarke, we stated at page 277: “ ‘In State v. Stevens, supra, an alibi was presented as a defense and the court held the credibility of alibi witnesses and the weight accorded to their testimony is properly a function of the jury. In State v. Grahn (1963), 21 Wis. 2d 49, 52 , 123 N. W. 2d 510 , the court noted that testimony supporting an alibi does not raise a reasonable doubt as a matter of law. “ ‘ ‘‘The defense of an alibi, if sufficiently established to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, is a good defense. However, owing to the ease with which persons may be mistaken in dates long after the occurrence of a particular event, the ease with which an alibi may be made, and the difficulty of proving to the contrary, courts have not generally considered evidence of an alibi a conclusive defense. It is merely evidence to be weighed by the jury.” State ex rel. Dewey v. Kibbe (1925), 186 Wis. 210, 212 , 202 N. W. 333 .’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 44 Wis. 2d 75 - State v. Richardson

2. “. In any event, it would be within the province of the trier of the fact to determine what effect the display of a defendant’s photograph to witnesses prior to their identification of him has on the weight and credibility of their subsequent identification. We find nothing in the testimony with respect to pictures of Brown that would render the witnesses’ positive identification incredible as a matter of law, or insufficient to convince beyond a reasonable doubt.’ Accord, State v. Clarke (1967), 36 Wis. 2d 263 , 153 N. W. 2d 61 .” See also: Brown v. State (1965), 28 Wis. 2d 383, 388 , 137 N. W. 2d 53 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 49 Wis. 2d 565 - State v. DiMaggio