give instruction in Wisconsin

7 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1883–1995 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.

Followed or applied (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
Lutz v. Shelby Mutual Insurancegreen wis · 1975 · cited in 2 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1983–1995 2 sentences 1995The Wisconsin Supreme Court stated in Lutz v. Shelby Mutual Insurance Co., 70 Wis. 2d 743, 750 , 235 N.W.2d 426, 431 (1975), that" [i] t is error for a court... to give an instruction on an issue which finds no support in the evidence." It is prejudicial error if an erroneous instruction probably and not merely possibly misleads the jury. 1995The Wisconsin Supreme Court stated in Lutz v. Shelby Mutual Insurance Co., 70 Wis. 2d 743, 750 , 235 N.W.2d 426, 431 (1975), that" [i] t is error for a court... to give an instruction on an issue which finds no support in the evidence." It is prejudicial error if an erroneous instruction probably and not merely possibly misleads the jury.	2	2
Cheney v. Stategreen wis · 1969 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992 2 sentences 1992The instruction is chiefly aimed at the situation where the state's case against the accused consists of nothing more than the accomplice's testimony, Cheney, 44 Wis. 2d at 467, 171 N.W.2d at 346 , and thus minimal corroboration of the accomplice's testimony will suffice to obviate the requirement that the trial court give the instruction. 1992The instruction is chiefly aimed at the situation where the state's case against the accused consists of nothing more than the accomplice's testimony, Cheney, 44 Wis. 2d at 467, 171 N.W.2d at 346 , and thus minimal corroboration of the accomplice's testimony will suffice to obviate the requirement that the trial court give the instruction.	1	1
Bizzle v. Stategreen wis · 1974 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992 2 sentences 1992See Bizzle, 65 Wis. 2d at 734 , 223 N.W.2d at 579 . 1992See Bizzle, 65 Wis. 2d at 734 , 223 N.W.2d at 579 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

Case	Cited	Years
Fischer Ex Rel. Fischer v. Ganju green wis · 1992 2 sentences 1995Fischer, 168 Wis. 2d at 849-50 , 485 N.W.2d at 16 ; Lutz, 70 Wis. 2d at 751 , 235 N.W.2d at 431 . 1995Fischer, 168 Wis. 2d at 849-50 , 485 N.W.2d at 16 ; Lutz, 70 Wis. 2d at 751 , 235 N.W.2d at 431 .	1	1995–1995
State v. Anderson green wis · 1971 2 sentences 1978The court did not think that the testimony that had been adduced constituted the negligent use of a weapon. [19] The standard by which to determine whether to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense has been stated in Day v. State, 55 Wis.2d 756, 759 , 201 N.W.2d 42 (1972), citing State v. Anderson, 51 Wis.2d 557, 560 , 187 N.W.2d 335 (1971) and State v. Bergenthal, 47 Wis.2d 668, 675 , 168 N.W.2d 16 (1970): "The test or standard for determining when lesser degrees of homicide than that charged are to be submitted to the jury has been clearly stated to be: "`To justify submitting lesser 1978The court did not think that the testimony that had been adduced constituted the negligent use of a weapon. [19] The standard by which to determine whether to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense has been stated in Day v. State, 55 Wis.2d 756, 759 , 201 N.W.2d 42 (1972), citing State v. Anderson, 51 Wis.2d 557, 560 , 187 N.W.2d 335 (1971) and State v. Bergenthal, 47 Wis.2d 668, 675 , 168 N.W.2d 16 (1970): "The test or standard for determining when lesser degrees of homicide than that charged are to be submitted to the jury has been clearly stated to be: "`To justify submitting lesser	1	1978–1978
State v. Bergenthal green wis · 1970 1 sentence 1978The court did not think that the testimony that had been adduced constituted the negligent use of a weapon. [19] The standard by which to determine whether to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense has been stated in Day v. State, 55 Wis.2d 756, 759 , 201 N.W.2d 42 (1972), citing State v. Anderson, 51 Wis.2d 557, 560 , 187 N.W.2d 335 (1971) and State v. Bergenthal, 47 Wis.2d 668, 675 , 168 N.W.2d 16 (1970): "The test or standard for determining when lesser degrees of homicide than that charged are to be submitted to the jury has been clearly stated to be: "`To justify submitting lesser	1	1978–1978
Day v. State green wis · 1972 2 sentences 1978The court did not think that the testimony that had been adduced constituted the negligent use of a weapon. [19] The standard by which to determine whether to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense has been stated in Day v. State, 55 Wis.2d 756, 759 , 201 N.W.2d 42 (1972), citing State v. Anderson, 51 Wis.2d 557, 560 , 187 N.W.2d 335 (1971) and State v. Bergenthal, 47 Wis.2d 668, 675 , 168 N.W.2d 16 (1970): "The test or standard for determining when lesser degrees of homicide than that charged are to be submitted to the jury has been clearly stated to be: "`To justify submitting lesser 1978The court did not think that the testimony that had been adduced constituted the negligent use of a weapon. [19] The standard by which to determine whether to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense has been stated in Day v. State, 55 Wis.2d 756, 759 , 201 N.W.2d 42 (1972), citing State v. Anderson, 51 Wis.2d 557, 560 , 187 N.W.2d 335 (1971) and State v. Bergenthal, 47 Wis.2d 668, 675 , 168 N.W.2d 16 (1970): "The test or standard for determining when lesser degrees of homicide than that charged are to be submitted to the jury has been clearly stated to be: "`To justify submitting lesser	1	1978–1978
Johns v. State green wis · 1961 2 sentences 1969In Johns v. State (1961), 14 Wis. 2d 119, 128 , 109 N. W. 2d 490 , this court concluded that the trial court did not err, “in the absence of a request by the accused, in not instructing the jury the omission of the accused to testify on his own behalf created no presumption against him.” The reasoning of Johns was applied in State v. Cartagena (1968), 40 Wis. 2d 213, 222 , 161 N. W. 2d 392 , where this court held that the trial court did not commit error in failing to instruct sua sponte that certain testimony was admissible only for impeachment purposes. 1969In Johns v. State (1961), 14 Wis. 2d 119, 128 , 109 N. W. 2d 490 , this court concluded that the trial court did not err, “in the absence of a request by the accused, in not instructing the jury the omission of the accused to testify on his own behalf created no presumption against him.” The reasoning of Johns was applied in State v. Cartagena (1968), 40 Wis. 2d 213, 222 , 161 N. W. 2d 392 , where this court held that the trial court did not commit error in failing to instruct sua sponte that certain testimony was admissible only for impeachment purposes.	1	1969–1969
State v. Cartagena neutral wis · 1968 2 sentences 1969In Johns v. State (1961), 14 Wis. 2d 119, 128 , 109 N. W. 2d 490 , this court concluded that the trial court did not err, “in the absence of a request by the accused, in not instructing the jury the omission of the accused to testify on his own behalf created no presumption against him.” The reasoning of Johns was applied in State v. Cartagena (1968), 40 Wis. 2d 213, 222 , 161 N. W. 2d 392 , where this court held that the trial court did not commit error in failing to instruct sua sponte that certain testimony was admissible only for impeachment purposes. 1969In Johns v. State (1961), 14 Wis. 2d 119, 128 , 109 N. W. 2d 490 , this court concluded that the trial court did not err, “in the absence of a request by the accused, in not instructing the jury the omission of the accused to testify on his own behalf created no presumption against him.” The reasoning of Johns was applied in State v. Cartagena (1968), 40 Wis. 2d 213, 222 , 161 N. W. 2d 392 , where this court held that the trial court did not commit error in failing to instruct sua sponte that certain testimony was admissible only for impeachment purposes.	1	1969–1969
Haefner v. Batz Seed Farms, Inc. green wis · 1949 2 sentences 1958Haefner v. Bats Seed Farms, 255 Wis. 438, 440 , 39 N. W. (2d) 386 . 1958Haefner v. Bats Seed Farms, 255 Wis. 438, 440 , 39 N. W. (2d) 386 .	1	1958–1958
Dickerson v. State neutral wis · 1880 1 sentence 1883Dickerson v. State, 48 Wis., 288 -294.	1	1883–1883

Where else courts name it

CA 86 (1892–2026) MO 55 (1886–2017) IL 35 (1873–2023) KS 24 (1882–2022) WA 24 (1900–2023) IN 24 (1856–2005) OK 24 (1894–1997) KY 23 (1914–1987) NC 22 (1887–2014) NE 20 (1893–2019) AR 20 (1906–1983) TX 18 (1899–2019) FL 17 (1898–1999) MI 16 (1924–2018) NY 16 (1904–2024) NJ 15 (1975–2022) GA 11 (1893–2022) OR 11 (1874–2026) CO 11 (1909–2021) IA 11 (1877–2016) MS 11 (1913–2014) VA 10 (1901–2012) OH 10 (1936–2017) WY 9 (1937–2016) AZ 9 (1956–2021) PA 8 (1947–2015) NM 8 (1938–1998) ID 8 (1911–2020) WV 8 (1896–2015) WI 7 (1883–1995) CT 7 (2007–2021) MT 6 (1900–1923) ME 6 (1995–2023) TN 5 (1960–2017) UT 5 (1905–2026) MD 5 (1946–2016) AL 5 (1963–1994) SD 4 (1894–1985) HI 4 (1918–2024) MN 4 (1921–2015) DC 3 (1988–1999) SC 2 (1907–1992)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check