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.
8 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1919–2026 5 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. DeLaingreen2 sentences2026See State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶¶25-26 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 (concluding that circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by denying a motion for mistrial based, in part, on the “isolated nature” of the State’s golden rule argument).7 ¶35 Second, the circuit court provided a limiting instruction to the jury that prohibited it from considering evidence that Gunn “was prosecuted for waving, threatening another with a machete” to conclude that Gunn “has a certain character or a certain character trait and that [he] acted in conformity with that trait or character 2026See State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶¶25-26 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 (concluding that circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by denying a motion for mistrial based, in part, on the “isolated nature” of the State’s golden rule argument).7 ¶35 Second, the circuit court provided a limiting instruction to the jury that prohibited it from considering evidence that Gunn “was prosecuted for waving, threatening another with a machete” to conclude that Gunn “has a certain character or a certain character trait and that [he] acted in conformity with that trait or character | 1 | 6 |
Genova v. Stategreen2 sentences2026In ruling on the admissibility of the fact of Gunn’s conviction, the circuit court stated that the scope of Sally’s testimony could be revisited at trial if that evidence “becomes relevant in the context of which it comes in.” Even so, the court minimized the prejudicial effect of Sally’s challenged testimony by preventing the evidence of Gunn’s conviction from being expounded on or addressed a second time. 14 No. 2024AP1637-CR Genova v. State, 91 Wis. 2d 595, 622 , 283 N.W.2d 483 (Ct. App. 1979) (“Where the trial court gives the jury a curative instruction, … the appellate court may conclude 2026In ruling on the admissibility of the fact of Gunn’s conviction, the circuit court stated that the scope of Sally’s testimony could be revisited at trial if that evidence “becomes relevant in the context of which it comes in.” Even so, the court minimized the prejudicial effect of Sally’s challenged testimony by preventing the evidence of Gunn’s conviction from being expounded on or addressed a second time. 14 No. 2024AP1637-CR Genova v. State, 91 Wis. 2d 595, 622 , 283 N.W.2d 483 (Ct. App. 1979) (“Where the trial court gives the jury a curative instruction, … the appellate court may conclude | 1 | 1 |
State v. Marinezgreen2 sentences2026See State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶¶25-26 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 (concluding that circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by denying a motion for mistrial based, in part, on the “isolated nature” of the State’s golden rule argument).7 ¶35 Second, the circuit court provided a limiting instruction to the jury that prohibited it from considering evidence that Gunn “was prosecuted for waving, threatening another with a machete” to conclude that Gunn “has a certain character or a certain character trait and that [he] acted in conformity with that trait or character 2026See State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶¶25-26 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 (concluding that circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by denying a motion for mistrial based, in part, on the “isolated nature” of the State’s golden rule argument).7 ¶35 Second, the circuit court provided a limiting instruction to the jury that prohibited it from considering evidence that Gunn “was prosecuted for waving, threatening another with a machete” to conclude that Gunn “has a certain character or a certain character trait and that [he] acted in conformity with that trait or character | 1 | 1 |
State v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2023See State v. Johnson, 153 Wis. 2d 121, 132 , 449 N.W.2d 845 (1990) (concluding there was no prejudice where defense counsel failed to object to the State’s closing argument references to the defendant as a “liar,” a “rapist” and “guilty”). ¶40 Walker further criticizes his trial counsel for failing to object to the State’s other comments in closing argument, including commenting on the credibility of the victims. 2023See State v. Johnson, 153 Wis. 2d 121, 132 , 449 N.W.2d 845 (1990) (concluding there was no prejudice where defense counsel failed to object to the State’s closing argument references to the defendant as a “liar,” a “rapist” and “guilty”). ¶40 Walker further criticizes his trial counsel for failing to object to the State’s other comments in closing argument, including commenting on the credibility of the victims. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Letticegreen2 sentences2004See State v. Lettice, 205 Wis. 2d 347, 352 , 556 N.W.2d 376 (Ct. App. 1996). 2004See State v. Lettice, 205 Wis. 2d 347, 352 , 556 N.W.2d 376 (Ct. App. 1996). | 1 | 1 |
Rodriguez v. Slatterygreen2 sentences2004See Rodriguez v. Slattery, 54 Wis. 2d 165, 170 , 194 N.W.2d 817 (1972). 2004See Rodriguez v. Slattery, 54 Wis. 2d 165, 170 , 194 N.W.2d 817 (1972). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. DeLain
green
2 sentences2025Zastrow contends that these comments were impermissible “golden rule” arguments. 23 No. 2023AP1628-CR ¶57 “In a criminal case, a golden rule argument asks the jurors to place themselves in the victim’s shoes.” State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶23 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 , aff’d, 2005 WI 52 , 280 Wis. 2d 51 , 695 N.W.2d 484 . 2025Zastrow contends that these comments were impermissible “golden rule” arguments. 23 No. 2023AP1628-CR ¶57 “In a criminal case, a golden rule argument asks the jurors to place themselves in the victim’s shoes.” State v. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, ¶23 , 272 Wis. 2d 356 , 679 N.W.2d 562 , aff’d, 2005 WI 52 , 280 Wis. 2d 51 , 695 N.W.2d 484 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Williams v. Williams
green
2 sentences1919Although entertaining, I hope, as high an opinion of the exalted nature of the duties and obligations of counselors at law as that expressed in the majority opinion, I cannot feel that they should be SO' set apart from the rest of mankind or that a rule which permits a brother of the blood to recover for requested services rendered to a brother of the blood who had no expectation of paying therefor, as was done in Williams v. Williams, 114 Wis. 79 , 89 N. W. 835 , supra, should not be as applicable to the 'relationship of brethren at the bar; the latter relationship surely calling for no more 1919Although entertaining, I hope, as high an opinion of the exalted nature of the duties and obligations of counselors at law as that expressed in the majority opinion, I cannot feel that they should be SO' set apart from the rest of mankind or that a rule which permits a brother of the blood to recover for requested services rendered to a brother of the blood who had no expectation of paying therefor, as was done in Williams v. Williams, 114 Wis. 79 , 89 N. W. 835 , supra, should not be as applicable to the 'relationship of brethren at the bar; the latter relationship surely calling for no more | 1 | 1919–1919 |
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.