66 Wis. 2d 636 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently August 2011 · most notably 86 Wis. 2d 459 - State v. Wollman (1979), 69 Wis. 2d 554 - State v. Amundson (1975)
24 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · 50 Wis. 2d 619 - State v. Paszek · 24 Wis. 2d 527 - State v. Nutley
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“every witness is competent to testify (with certain noted exceptions) and [ ] all former competency issues now are issues of credibility to be dealt with by the trier of fact”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The defendant further moves the court, III: “SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE. “A. THE COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SECURED IN VIOLATION OF THE DEFENDANT’S FIFTH AMENDMENT PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION. “This particular portion of the defendant’s motion has to do with the clothing the defendant put on immediately after his arrest. This clothing was subsequently received into evidence. It had been tested and revealed blood stains of the type of the decedent, Allean Mosley, which was different than the blood type of the defendant. “A motion to suppress this evidence was heard before this court in July of 1973. The officers testifying at that time indicated that they either told or request ed the defendant to put on the same clothes he had on the previous night, namely, April 5th, 1972. The defendant, however, testified as follows at that particular hearing: “ ‘QUESTION: When you were told to get dressed did you retrieve the clothes or were they given to you? “‘ANSWER: I walked into the bedroom and immediately was handed clothing to put on. “ ‘QUESTION: And prior to be given those clothes was it inspected or shaken down in any way? “ ‘ANSWER: When Officer Enk gave me the clothes he grabbed some clothing and immediately began feeling it, I assumed, to see if there were any weapons or anything in those clothes. “ ‘QUESTION: And were you told at that time, Mr. Davis, or any time while you were in the bedroom, to put on the clothes you were wearing the night before? “ ‘”
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.