Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 Wis. 2d 267 - State v. Wind

60 Wis. 2d 267 - State v. Wind’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
10
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 72 Ill. 2d 203 - People v. Park (1978), State v. Cosgrove (1980)

46 state decisions — followed in 10 states

24019731980199020002010decided

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 Unruh v. Industrial Commission · 41 Wis. 2d 537 - Roberts v. State · 53 Wis. 2d 776 - State v. Zdiarstek · 53 Wis. 2d 734 - State v. Hunt · 39 Wis. 2d 733 - State v. Midell

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

  1. ““. . . [W]e do not believe that the test need be specific for marijuana in order to be probative. An expert opinion that the substance is probably marijuana even if the test used is not exclusive is probative and admissible, but standing alone is not sufficient to meet the burden of proving the identity of the substance beyond a reasonable doubt. If this were a possession case, the tests would be insufficient. But here, we have other facts which particularize and support the opinion of the expert: namely, the police officer asked for marijuana, and Wind agreed to sell marijuana and charged a price which would indicate it was marijuana. These facts are sufficient with the expert opinion to meet the standards of sufficiency under the ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ test.” Id. at 272 .”
    3 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.