Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
12 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Bauergreen2 sentences1995"If the evidence does not fit within a recognized hearsay exception, it must be excluded." Id. 1995"If the evidence does not fit within a recognized hearsay exception, it must be excluded." Id. | 2 | 8 |
Bruton v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2002Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 137 (1968); Bauer, 109 Wis. 2d at 210 . | 1 | 1 |
Scotto v. Dilbert Bros.green1 sentence1993See, e.g., Kalos v. United States, 9 F.2d 268, 271 (8th Cir. 1925); Indian Fred v. State, 282 P. 930, 933-34 (Ariz. 1929); Garcia v. State, 68 N.W.2d 151, 158-59 (Neb. 1955); Scotto v. Dilbert Bros., Inc., 33 N.Y.S.2d 835, 836 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Kalos v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1993See, e.g., Kalos v. United States, 9 F.2d 268, 271 (8th Cir. 1925); Indian Fred v. State, 282 P. 930, 933-34 (Ariz. 1929); Garcia v. State, 68 N.W.2d 151, 158-59 (Neb. 1955); Scotto v. Dilbert Bros., Inc., 33 N.Y.S.2d 835, 836 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Garcia v. Stategreen1 sentence1993See, e.g., Kalos v. United States, 9 F.2d 268, 271 (8th Cir. 1925); Indian Fred v. State, 282 P. 930, 933-34 (Ariz. 1929); Garcia v. State, 68 N.W.2d 151, 158-59 (Neb. 1955); Scotto v. Dilbert Bros., Inc., 33 N.Y.S.2d 835, 836 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
Indian Fred v. Stategreen1 sentence1993See, e.g., Kalos v. United States, 9 F.2d 268, 271 (8th Cir. 1925); Indian Fred v. State, 282 P. 930, 933-34 (Ariz. 1929); Garcia v. State, 68 N.W.2d 151, 158-59 (Neb. 1955); Scotto v. Dilbert Bros., Inc., 33 N.Y.S.2d 835, 836 (N.Y. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Martinezgreen2 sentences1992The constitutional issue of confrontation is not reached, however, unless the out-of-court statement is admissible under a recognized hearsay exception, Rules 908.03 and 908.045, Stats., or a hearsay exclusion, Rule 908.01(4), Stats. 3 See State v. Martinez, 150 Wis. 2d 62, 70 , 440 N.W.2d 783, 786 (1989). 1992The constitutional issue of confrontation is not reached, however, unless the out-of-court statement is admissible under a recognized hearsay exception, Rules 908.03 and 908.045, Stats., or a hearsay exclusion, Rule 908.01(4), Stats. 3 See State v. Martinez, 150 Wis. 2d 62, 70 , 440 N.W.2d 783, 786 (1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Crawford v. Washington
green
1 sentence2018Crawford v. Washington , 541 U.S. 36 , 68-69 (2004). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Mitchell v. State
green
2 sentences2000The State relies upon Mitchell v. State, 84 Wis. 2d 325 , 267 N.W.2d 349 (1978), and State v. Gilles, 173 Wis. 2d 101 , 496 N.W.2d 133 (Ct. App. 1992), to support this argument. ¶ 22. 2000The State relies upon Mitchell v. State, 84 Wis. 2d 325 , 267 N.W.2d 349 (1978), and State v. Gilles, 173 Wis. 2d 101 , 496 N.W.2d 133 (Ct. App. 1992), to support this argument. ¶ 22. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Gilles
green
2 sentences2000The State relies upon Mitchell v. State, 84 Wis. 2d 325 , 267 N.W.2d 349 (1978), and State v. Gilles, 173 Wis. 2d 101 , 496 N.W.2d 133 (Ct. App. 1992), to support this argument. ¶ 22. 2000The State relies upon Mitchell v. State, 84 Wis. 2d 325 , 267 N.W.2d 349 (1978), and State v. Gilles, 173 Wis. 2d 101 , 496 N.W.2d 133 (Ct. App. 1992), to support this argument. ¶ 22. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Nelson
green
1 sentence1989Nelson, 138 Wis. 2d at 429-30 ; State v. Bauer, 109 Wis. 2d 204, 215 , 325 N.W.2d 857 (1982). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.