59 Wis. 2d 116 - Baldwin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 22 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In a criminal prosecution if there is any credible evidence which in any reasonable view supports the verdict it cannot be disturbed on appeal. . . . At trial, the state must prove defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; however, on appeal reversal is warranted only when the evidence considered most favorable to the state and conviction, is so insufficient in probative value and force that it can be said as a matter of law that no trier of facts acting reasonably could be convinced to the degree of certitude the law defines as beyond a reasonable doubt. . .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 91 Wis. 2d 14 - State v. Sarinske · 74 Wis. 2d 705 - State v. Courtney

2. ““Penetration may be proved by means other than an account based on visual observations. The Arkansas Supreme Court, in Needham v. State (1949), 215 Ark. 935, 990 , 224 S.W.2d 785, 788 , rejecting a similar argument, stated: ‘.. . If it were necessary that this element of rape be proved in every case by an eye-witness, the accused could not ordinarily be convicted if the prose-cutrix’ vision had been obscured by darkness, unconsciousness or any other cause. But that is not the law; penetration, like other facts, may be proved by means other than an account based on visual observation”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Omans v. State

3. ““It must be remembered that the term ‘utmost resistance’ is a relative rather than a positive term. What would be ‘utmost resistance’ on the part of a weak and nervous person, with a temperament easily frightened, might be the veriest sham on the part of a robust person in good health, whose nerves and courage are normal.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 64 Wis. 2d 590 - Dumer v. State