State v. Coombs’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 30 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A confession motivated by a promise of leniency by a person with apparent authority' to execute the promise is involuntary and inadmissible. State v. Tardiff, 374 A.2d 598 , 601 (Me.1977). At the suppression hearing, Sergeant Carter testified that he ' did not promise Coombs anything in exchange for her confession and, although he conceded that he flushed the marijuana down the toilet, he denied telling Coombs that she would not be charged with possession if she confessed to the theft. Although Coombs testified to the contrary, the suppression judge, as the fact finder, was free to accept Sergeant Carter’s testimony over Coombs’. See State v. Larrivee, 479 A.2d 347 , 349 (Me.1984); State v. Knights, 482 A.2d 436 , 442 (Me.1984). The trial court’s finding is based on competent evidence and is not clearly erroneous.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Coombs v. Maine

2. “[T]he nature of [the] inquiry itself lends support to the conclusion that “volun-tariness” is a legal question meriting independent consideration in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Although sometimes framed as an issue of “psychological fact,” the dispositive question of the voluntariness of a confession has always had a uniquely legal dimension.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of Maine v. Timothy M. Hunt

3. “Whether a defendant has validly waived her Miranda rights depends on the factual circumstances of the interrogation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hopkins