47 Wis. 2d 695 - Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 1993 · most notably 60 Wis. 2d 683 - State v. Cydzik (1973), 51 Wis. 2d 564 - Lampkins v. State (1971)
37 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 Illinois Power Co. v. Local Union No. 51, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers · State v. Stevens · 40 Wis. 2d 474 - Curl v. State · 14 Wis. 2d 119 - Johns v. State · 28 Wis. 2d 652 - State v. Kanzelberger
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.
““Self-defense is an issue in this case. “The Criminal Code of Wisconsin provides that a person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what he reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his person by such other person. However, he may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as he reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. He may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. “For the defendant’s conduct to be privileged under the law of self-defense, the defendant must have reasonably believed that there was an actual or imminent unlawful interference with his person. This requires that he actually believed such interference to be unlawful. The fact that this belief may have been erroneous does not deprive the defendant of his privilege to use force in defense of his person if a person of ordinary intelligence and prudence under the same circumstances, would have believed such interference to be unlawful.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““940.05. Manslaughter. Whoever causes the death of another human being under any of the following circumstances may be imprisoned not more than 10 years: ... (2) Unnecessarily, in the exercise of his privilege of self-defense or defense of others or the privilege to prevent or terminate the commission of a felony;”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[f]rom this testimony it is apparent that Mr. Roe did not believe that the force employed by him was necessary to prevent or terminate what he believed (whether that belief was reasonable or otherwise) to be an unlawful interference with his person.”
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.