14 Ohio App. 3d 111 - State v. Arrington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

58 state decisions

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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`is given to understand that he might reasonably expect benefits in the nature of more lenient treatment at the hands of the police, prosecution or court in consideration of making a statement, even a truthful one, such motivation is deemed to render the statement involuntary and inadmissible. The offer or promise of such benefit need not be expressed, but may be implied from equivocal language not otherwise made clear.'”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Beltowski, Unpublished Decision (4-29-2005) · State v. Mason, Unpublished Decision (6-13-2005)

2. “Where an accused's decision to speak was motivated by police officers' statements constituting 'direct or indirect promises' of leniency or benefit and other representations regarding the possibility of probation which were misstatements of the law, his incriminating statements, not being freely self-determined, were improperly induced, involuntary and inadmissible as a matter of law.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Phillips, Unpublished Decision (9-3-2004) · State v. Miku

3. “`the product of a rational intellect and a free will.' * * * The fifth amendment secures `the right of a person to remain silent unless he chooses to speak in the unfettered exercise of his own will, and to suffer no penalty . . . for such silence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Beltowski, Unpublished Decision (4-29-2005)