99 Wis. 2d 700 - State v. Kramer’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently October 2019
15 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 State v. Gerdes · 85 Wis. 2d 233 - State v. Hanson · 4 Kan. App. 2d 314 - State v. Primm · State v. McDonough · Biesser v. Town of Holland
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““1. The officer operating the device has adequate training and experience in its operation. “2. That the radar device was in proper working condition at the time of the arrest. This will be established by proof that suggested methods of testing the proper functioning of the device were followed. “3. That the device was used in an area where road conditions are such that there is a minimum possibility of distortion. “4. That the input speed of the patrol car must be verified, this being especially important where there is a reasonable dispute that road conditions may have distorted the accuracy of the reading (i.e., presence of large trucks, congested traffic and the roadside being heavily covered with trees and signs). “5. That the speed meter should be expertly tested within a reasonable proximity following the arrest and that such testing be done by means which do not rely on the radar device’s own internal calibrations.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It should also be noted that the fourth Hanson criterion requires the operating officer to verify the patrol car’s input speed by using the radar device’s verification mechanism. The officer can then visually compare the vehicle’s [the patrol car’s] speed as measured by the radar device with the speed as registered on the vehicle’s speedometer.” Kramer at 706-07.”
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.