Wisconsin v. Mitchell
Significance, Further Readings
State of Wisconsin
That the Wisconsin statute allowing penalty enhancements for crimes motivated by the "race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry" of the victim was constitutional, and that respondent's enhanced sentence should stand.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
James E. Doyle, Attorney General of Wisconsin
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Lynn S. Adelman
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Clarence Thomas, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
11 June 1993
The Court decided that the Wisconsin statute did not violate the protections guaranteed by the First Amendment, and allowed the original sentence to stand.
- United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982).
- Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939 (1983).
- R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992).
- Woody Allen-Mia Farrow Custody Trial: 1993 - Life Imitating Art?, The Custody Trial Begins, The Aftermath
- William Kennedy Smith Trial: 1991 - Tabloid Interview Nets $40,000, Defendant Remains Cool, Suggestions For Further Reading
- Wisconsin v. Mitchell - Significance
- Wisconsin v. Mitchell - Further Readings
- Other Free Encyclopedias