State v. Ohlson’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
3
states following
June 2012
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Crawford v. Washington · Davis v. Washington · Lilly v. Virginia · Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada Humboldt County et al. · 119 Wash. 2d 401 - State v. Strauss
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Characteristics to consider when objectively assessing the circumstances of the interrogation include the timing of the statements, the threat of harm, the need for information to resolve a present emergency, and the formality of the interrogation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Koslowski“inconsistent with the Court's emphasis [in Davis ]... [, which] supports a more nuanced approach when considering the timing of a statement than merely noting whether a declarant phrased his or her statement using past or present tense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Koslowski“`neither a cry for help nor the provision of information enabling officers immediately to end a threatening situation, the fact that they were given at an alleged crime scene and were "initial inquiries”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Koslowski
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.