State v. Leach’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 128 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Powell (2012), State v. Graham (Slip Opinion) (2020)
1 federal appellate · 128 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Escobedo v. Illinois · Doyle v. Ohio · Malloy v. Hogan · Kastigar v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]ecause the evidence of guilt was not overwhelming in this case, the admission of defendant's pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence was clearly prejudicial.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[u]se of pre-arrest silence in the state's case-in-chief would force defendants either to permit the jury to infer guilt from their silence or surrender their right not to testify and take the stand to explain their prior silence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“When a defendant testifies at trial, the defendant has cast aside his cloak of silence. Thus, use of pre-arrest silence as impeachment evidence is permitted because it furthers the truth-seeking process. Otherwise, a criminal defendant would be provided an opportunity to perjure himself at trial, and the state would be powerless to correct the record. But using a defendant's prior silence as substantive evidence of guilt actually lessens the prosecution's burden of proving each element of the crime and impairs the sense of fair play underlying the privilege.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.