83 Wis. 2d 601 - Zelenka v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably 131 Wis. 2d 153 - State v. Fry (1986), 96 Wis. 2d 531 - State v. Shaffer (1980)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 46 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 · Johnson v. Zerbst · United States v. Agurs · Michigan v. Mosley · Branzburg v. Hayes
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a newsman believes that the grand jury investigation is not being conducted, in good faith he is not without remedy. Indeed, if the newsman is;called upon to give information bearing only a. remote and tenuous relationship to the subject of the investigation, or if he has some other reason to believe that his testimony implicates confidential source relationships without a legitimate need of law enforcement, he will have access to the court on a motion to quash and an appropriate protective order may be entered. The asserted claim to privilege should be judged on its facts by the striking of a proper balance between freedom of the press and the obligation of all citizens to give relevant testimony with respect to criminal conduct. The balance of these vital constitutional and societal interests on a case-by-case basis accords with the tried and traditional way of adjudicating such questions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[H]e simply waited too long for withdrawal to be possible. "A conspirator cannot escape responsibility for an act which is the natural result of a criminal scheme which he has helped to devise and carry forward because, as the result either of fear or even of a better motive, he concludes to run away at the very instant when the act in question is about to be committed and when the transaction which immediately begets it has actually been commenced."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"The state correctly responds that Zelenka falls short of proving this defense. First, it correctly notes that the jury is not required to believe everything a witness says, particularly when that witness is the sole possessor of the facts at hand and has an interest in the outcome." (Footnote omitted.)”
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.