Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 SO3D 611 - State v. Bernard

State v. Bernard’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
March 2010
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · West v. Atkins · Stansbury v. California · Thompson v. Keohane · Mathis 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Our holding will be spelled out with some specificity in the pages which follow, but, briefly stated, it is this: the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by laiv enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.