146 N.C. App. 113 - State v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`It is well established that Miranda warnings are required only when a [criminal] defendant is subjected to custodial interrogation.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 203 N.C. App. 374 - State v. Hightower · 158 N.C. App. 133 - State v. Fisher

2. “questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 203 N.C. App. 374 - State v. Hightower · 200 N.C. App. 506 - State v. Stover

3. ““It is well established that the standard of review in evaluating a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress is that the trial court’s findings of fact “ ‘are conclusive on appeal if supported by competent evidence, even if the evidence is conflicting.’ ” ” However, the determination of whether a defendant was in custody, based on those findings of fact, is a question of law that is fully reviewable by this Court. Likewise, a trial court’s conclusion that a defendant’s statements were voluntary is a conclusion of law that is fully reviewable on appeal. It is well established that Miranda warnings are required only when a defendant is subjected to custodial interrogation. In Miranda, the United States Supreme Court defined “custodial interrogation” as “questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.” “[T]he appropriate inquiry in determining whether a defendant is ‘in custody’ for purposes of Miranda is, based on the totality of the circumstances, whether there was a ‘formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 155 N.C. App. 698 - State v. Earwood