59 Wis. 2d 474 - Nelson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

53 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor — indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.’ ” (Footnote omitted.) Nelson v. State, 59 Wis. 2d 474 , 208 N.W.2d 410 (1973).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Harris · 126 Wis. 2d 123 - Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Zapf

2. ““While the state committed constitutional error in the suppression of exculpatory evidence, such error did not constitute prejudicial error or require a new trial in the interest of justice. This is not a case wherein the serious misconduct of the prosecutor necessitates a new trial, even in the absence of a showing of prejudice, in order to sustain the integrity of the judicial process. A conviction obtained by means of a fair trial will not be overturned and a new trial granted to punish society for the nonprejudicial misconduct of the prosecutor.” (Citation omitted.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 118 Wis. 2d 177 - State v. Ruiz · 113 Wis. 2d 273 - State v. Ruiz

3. “The state has the affirmative duty to disclose to the defendant or his counsel any material or information within its possession or control which tends to negate the guilt of the defendant....”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 297 Wis. 2d 583 - State v. Jens · 385 Wis. 2d 344 - State v. Gary Lee Wayerski