Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 83 Wis. 2d 647 - State v. Verhasselt

83 Wis. 2d 647 - State v. Verhasselt’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
2
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 63 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably 136 Wis. 2d 222 - State v. Clappes (1987), 96 Wis. 2d 531 - State v. Shaffer (1980)

2 federal appellate · 63 state decisions

400197819801990200020102020decided

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 · Gault · Gallegos v. State of Colorado · California v. Curry · United States v. Unicorn Enterprises, Inc.

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

  1. “conviction of a crime may not be grounded on the admission or confessions of the accused alone.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]f there is corroboration of any significant fact”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “conduct imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind, regardless of human life.” Sec. 941.30, Stats. The evidence was undisputed that the defendant turned on his headlights and swerved to avoid the squad car on the one- way street, and that he sounded his horn and braked in an attempt to avoid colliding with the other vehicle. In light of these facts, the court held that the”
    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.