85 Wis. 2d 148 - Kohlhoff v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

32 state decisions

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.

1. “When, during its deliberations, a jury poses a question regarding testimony that has been presented, the jury has a right to have that testimony read to it, subject to the discretion of the trial judge to limit the reading.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Anderson · State v. Lombard

2. ““This court’s review is limited to determining whether the evidence adduced, believed and rationally considered by the jury was sufficient to prove defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. State ex rel. Kanieski v. Gagnon, 54 Wis.2d 108, 113 , 194 N.W.2d 808 (1972). The jury may convict on the basis of uncorroborated testimony, Grayson v. State, 35 Wis.2d 360, 366 , 151 N.W.2d 100 (1967), unless that testimony is patently or inherently incredible. Gauthier v. State, 28 Wis.2d 412, 418 , 137 N.W.2d 101 (1965). Inconsistencies and contradictions in a witness’ testimony are for the jury to consider in judging credibility and the relative credibility of the witnesses is a decision for the jury. Kain v. State, 48 Wis.2d 212, 217 , 179 N.W.2d 777 (1970). The jury may consider a witness’ motives in this weighing process. State v. Harling, 44 Wis.2d 266, 276 , 170 N.W.2d 720 (1966).” Kohlhoff v. State, 85 Wis.2d 148, 153-54 , 270 N.W.2d 63 (1978).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 91 Wis. 2d 647 - Boyer v. State