76 Wis. 2d 375 - Reichhoff v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

cited by 42 later decisions

states following

August 2005

most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently August 2005 · most notably 143 Wis. 2d 226 - State v. Sorenson (1988), State v. Knapp (2005)

2 federal appellate · 40 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Griffin v. California · Doyle v. Ohio · Michigan v. Tucker

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

“a tacit admission of guilt on the part of the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 109 Wis. 2d 224 - State v. Fencl · 223 Wis. 2d 60 - State v. Adams
“The difference between prosecutorial use of the defendant's silence at trial and prosecutorial use of the defendant's silence at time of arrest is miniscule. We believe that in both circumstances reference to the defendant's silence does `no more than turn on the red light of potential prejudice involving the defendant's fifth amendment rights.' United States v. Arnold, 425 F.2d 204, 206 (10th Cir 1970).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 109 Wis. 2d 224 - State v. Fencl
““In accord with our decision today, it is impermissible to penalize an individual for exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege when he is under police custodial interrogation. The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial the fact that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 468, note 37 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. Ed.2d 694 (1966).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 78 Wis. 2d 435 - Rudolph v. State

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.