State v. Thornton, 2004 WI 35 (Wis. 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Thornton, 2004 WI 35 (Wis. 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Under fire: who is questioning this case
Citations from separate opinions of courts that could overrule this case. This is a warning signal, not a treatment change. The flag color above is unaffected.
Concurrence Scott Smith v. Greg Kleynerman (2017)
“State v. Thornton, 2004 WI 35 , 270 Wis. 2d 265 , 677 N.W.2d 274 (on petition for review). 95.”
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
William H. Thornton, Jr., Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner
01-1402.
Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Mar 30, 2004.
2004 WI 35
2004 Wisc. LEXIS 235
For the defendant-appellant-petitioner there were briefs by Robert R. Henak and Henak Law Office, S.C., Milwaukee, and oral argument by Robert R. Henak., For the plaintiff-respondent the cause was argued by William L. Gansner, assistant attorney general, with whom on the brief was Peggy A. Lautenschlager, attorney general.
Wilcox, Prosser, Roggensack, Abrahamson, Bradley, Crooks, Sykes.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

¶ 1. The court is equally divided on the question of whether the decision of the court of appeals, State v. Thornton, No. 01-1402, unpublished slip op. (Wis. Ct. App. March 5, 2002), should be affirmed or reversed.

Justice JON E WILCOX, Justice DAVID T. PROSSER and Justice PATIENCE D. ROGGENSACK would affirm; Chief Justice SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, Justice ANN WALSH BRADLEY, and Justice N. PATRICK CROOKS would reverse. Justice DIANE S. SYKES did not participate.

¶ 2. Accordingly, the decision of the court of appeals is affirmed.