87 Wis. 2d 253 - State v. Koller’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 72 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably 153 Wis. 2d 493 - State v. Poellinger (1990), 124 Wis. 2d 628 - State v. Pitsch (1985)
6 federal appellate · 72 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 Glasser v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Washington v. Texas · Holloway v. Arkansas
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[W]hen the question of the sufficiency of the evidence is presented on appeal in a criminal case the only question for this court is whether the evidence adduced, believed and rationally considered by the jury, was sufficient to prove the defendants’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. . . . This ultimate test is the same whether the trier of the facts is a court or a jury.. . . The test is not whether this court is convinced of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt but whether this court can conclude the trier of the facts could, acting reasonably, be convinced to the required degree of certitude by the evidence which it had a right to believe and accept as true.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Conversely stated, the test is whether, when considered most favorably to the state and the conviction, the evidence is so insufficient in probative value and force that it can be said as a matter of law that no trier of facts acting reasonably could be convinced to that degree of certitude which the law defines as "beyond a reasonable doubt.” Furthermore, it is not necessary that this court be convinced of the defendant’s guilt but only that the court is satisfied the jury acting reasonably could be so convinced.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“beyond a reasonable doubt.” Furthermore, it is not necessary that this court be convinced of the defendant’s guilt but only that the court is satisfied the jury acting reasonably could be so convinced. Id. (Citations omitted.) Our review is further limited by the principle that”
2 later decisions 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.