Splunge v. Parke’s Empirical Analysis
160 F.3d 369 · 1998
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 2020
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 Kotteakos v. United States · Giglio v. United States · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · Brecht v. Abrahamson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Doyle does not apply to cross-examination that merely inquires into prior inconsistent statements. Such question ing makes no unfair use of silence because a defendant who voluntarily speaks after receiving Miranda warnings has not been induced to remain silent. As to the subject matter of his statements, the defendant has not remained silent at all.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Simmons“what Doyle stands for is that arrest-time silence not be used to impeach trial-time testimony by asking something like: ‘If the version of events to which you have just testified is true, why didn’t you tell this to the police as soon as you were arrested?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bieghler v. McBride
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.