7 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Interest of TRBgreen2 sentences1984This is the degree of probable cause required to bind over an adult for criminal trial." 109 Wis. 2d at 192 . *876 In addition, we held that if waiver is not contested, the juvenile court may determine whether the matter has prosecutive merit under sec. 48.18(4), Stats., solely on the basis of the delinquency and waiver petitions without taking testimony or considering evidence other than the petitions. 1984See 109 Wis. 2d at 198 . | 1 | 1 |
Winburn v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Winburn v. State, 32 Wis.2d 152, 161 , 145 N.W.2d 178, 182 (1966). 5 We do not reach the question of whether a prosecutor can rely merely on the delinquency and waiver petitions to show prose-cutive merit without presenting additional supportive evidence. 1981Winburn v. State, 32 Wis.2d 152, 161 , 145 N.W.2d 178, 182 (1966). 5 We do not reach the question of whether a prosecutor can rely merely on the delinquency and waiver petitions to show prose-cutive merit without presenting additional supportive evidence. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In RE MARRIAGE OF SCHORER v. Schorer
green
2 sentences2021There is no doubt that the court here did both. ¶18 As to the facts, the juvenile court considered the delinquency and waiver petitions, the testimony at the hearing, the waiver report filed by the social worker, and T.G.’s school records. “[T]he weight and credibility of the evidence 8 No. 2021AP351 [are] matters … that are left to the discretion of the [juvenile] court.” Schorer v. Schorer, 177 Wis. 2d 387, 400 , 501 N.W.2d 916 (Ct. App. 1993). 2021There is no doubt that the court here did both. ¶18 As to the facts, the juvenile court considered the delinquency and waiver petitions, the testimony at the hearing, the waiver report filed by the social worker, and T.G.’s school records. “[T]he weight and credibility of the evidence 8 No. 2021AP351 [are] matters … that are left to the discretion of the [juvenile] court.” Schorer v. Schorer, 177 Wis. 2d 387, 400 , 501 N.W.2d 916 (Ct. App. 1993). | 2 | 2021–2022 |
State v. Hezzie R.
green
2 sentences2008See Wis. Stat. § 938.31 (2); State v. Hezzie R., 219 Wis. 2d 848, 858 , 580 N.W.2d 660 (1998). 2008See Wis. Stat. § 938.31 (2); State v. Hezzie R., 219 Wis. 2d 848, 858 , 580 N.W.2d 660 (1998). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
In Interest of Jermaine Tj
green
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
In Matter of EB
green
2 sentences1985In In Matter of E.B., 111 Wis. 2d 175 , 330 N.W.2d 584 (1983), for example, the court of appeals, the parties and this court assumed, without discussing the issue, that secs. 805.13(4) and 972.10(5) applied to a delinquency hearing. 3 We therefore turn to sec. 805.13 (3) for assistance in the issue before us. 1985In In Matter of E.B., 111 Wis. 2d 175 , 330 N.W.2d 584 (1983), for example, the court of appeals, the parties and this court assumed, without discussing the issue, that secs. 805.13(4) and 972.10(5) applied to a delinquency hearing. 3 We therefore turn to sec. 805.13 (3) for assistance in the issue before us. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
In Interest of JG
green
2 sentences1984In my concurring opinion in In the Interest of J.G., 119 Wis. 2d 748 , 350 N.W.2d 668 (1984), also decided today, I note that prosecutive merit may be used in different senses in sec. 48.18(4) and 48.18(5) and that different types of proof may be necessary under each section. 1984In my concurring opinion in In the Interest of J.G., 119 Wis. 2d 748 , 350 N.W.2d 668 (1984), also decided today, I note that prosecutive merit may be used in different senses in sec. 48.18(4) and 48.18(5) and that different types of proof may be necessary under each section. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.