Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 86 Wis. 2d 554 - Francis v. State

86 Wis. 2d 554 - Francis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2016

17 state decisions

9019791980199020002010decided

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 Drew v. United States · Baker v. United States · 13 Cal. 3d 35 - People v. Matson · Bayless v. United States · United States v. Weber

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

  1. “'that tends to establish the identity of the perpetrator.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Joinder of crimes and of defendants. (1) Joinder op crimes. Two or more crimes may be charged in the same complaint, information or indictment in a separate count for each crime if the crimes charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors, or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on 2 or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan. When a misdemeanor is joined with a felony, the trial shall be in the court with jurisdiction to try the felony. “(4) Trial together op separate charges. The court may order 2 or more complaints, informations or indictments to be tried together if the crimes . . ., if there is more than one, could have been joined in a single complaint, information or indictment. The procedure shall be the same as if the prosecution were under such single complaint, information or indictment.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““(3) Relief prom prejudicial joinder. If it appears that a defendant or the state is prejudiced by a joinder of crimes or of defendants in a complaint, information or indictment or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires. The district attorney shall advise the court prior to trial if he intends to use the statement of a codefendant which implicates another defendant in the crime charged. Thereupon, the judge shall grant a severance as to any such defendant.””
    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.