76 Wis. 2d 259 - Holmes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably 93 Wis. 2d 278 - Elias v. State (1980), 106 Wis. 2d 185 - State v. Hoffman (1982)
2 federal appellate · 61 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 49 Wis. 2d 263 - McCleary v. State · 34 Wis. 2d 278 - Whitty v. State · 70 Wis. 2d 280 - Rosado v. State · 70 Wis. 2d 508 - In Re Hon. Charles E. Kading · 64 Wis. 2d 485 - Scales 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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[f]ailure to object results in a waiver of any contest to that evidence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““. . . evidence relating to the armed robbery was relevant to the issue of the attempted murder charge, in that it provided the motive for the shooting at the police officer. The armed robbery, the flight with the officers in pursuit, and the attempted murder to evade apprehension, all arose out of a single transaction. The reason that the defendant shot at the police officer was to attempt to thwart his apprehension for the armed robbery.” Holmes, supra, 76 Wis.2d at 267 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
2 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.