State v. Higgs

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the element of \bodily harm\ was established where the victim simply experienced a burning and stinging sensation in his eyes caused by contact with urine
• defendant challenged the factual basis for his no contest plea; the court applied the same standards that exist for a challenge to a guilty plea
• defendant challenged the factual basis for his no contest plea; the court applied the same standards that exist for a challenge to a guilty plea

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Robert Yates v. United States
  Seventh Circuit· 2016-12-02· cited 18×
• Patrick Allen Jones v. United States
  Eighth Circuit· 2017-08-29· cited 5×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Rock
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1979-12-04· cited 45×
• State v. Dawson
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1999-02-23· cited 39×
• State v. West
  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin· 1997-10-28· cited 16×
• People v. Walker
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1997-08-19· cited 9×
• State v. White
  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin· 1982-09-21· cited 3×
• State v. White
  Wisconsin Supreme Court· 1983-04-26· cited 3×