49 Wis. 2d 246 - State v. Melvin’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 114 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably 150 Wis. 2d 688 - State v. Blalock (1989), 100 Wis. 2d 452 - Hagenkord v. State (1981)
2 federal appellate · 114 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Sansone v. United States · Berra v. United States · 31 Wis. 2d 110 - Lock v. State · 33 Wis. 2d 373 - Commodore v. State · 40 Wis. 2d 95 - Holesome 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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The early cases point out and emphasize and we must stress again, because the question keeps recurring, that a determination of whether an instruction on a lesser included crime should be given to a jury is not solved by merely determining the crime charged includes the lesser offense because juries are not to be given the discretion or freedom to pick and choose what offense the accused should be found guilty of. [Citation omitted.] The evidence must throw doubt upon the greater offense. Juries cannot rightly convict of the lesser offense merely from sympathy or for the purpose of reaching an agreement. They are bound by the evidence and should be limited to those included crimes which a reasonable view of the evidence will sustain and does not convince beyond a reasonable doubt the additional element of the greater crime existed.” [State v. Melvin, 49 Wis.2d 246, 253 , 181 N.W.2d 490, 494 (1970).]”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage““An attempt” * * * requires that the actor have an intent to perform acts and attain a result which if accomplished would constitute the crime. Acts to constitute an attempt must unequivocally demonstrate that the actor had such intent and would have committed the crime excepting for the intervention of another person or some other extraneous factor. Homicide by reckless conduct does not require any intent to attain a result which if accomplished would constitute a crime; and consequently, one cannot attempt to commit a crime which only requires reckless conduct and not a specific intent.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage““(1) A crime which does not require proof of any fact in addition to those which must be proved for the crime charged;”
4 later decisions 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.