92 Wis. 2d 690 - Walker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 49 Wis. 2d 246 - State v. Melvin · 40 Wis. 2d 95 - Holesome v. State · 63 Wis. 2d 389 - Holmes v. State · 53 Wis. 2d 483 - Thomas v. State · 56 Wis. 2d 728 - Tucker v. State
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing him to reasonably believe that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, he is privileged to act in self-defense, but he is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to his assailant unless he reasonably believes he has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his assailant. “(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his assailant. “(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Without either the privilege of self-defense or an intent to kill, Walker’s action falls clearly within [endangering safety]Walker, 92 Wis.2d at 694 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The submission of lesser included offenses, where appropriate, it is right of both the accused and the State.”
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.