Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 So. 2d 574 - Jones v. State

200 So. 2d 574 - Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
3
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably 491 So. 2d 1129 - State v. DiGuilio (1986), Bennett v. State (1975)

55 state decisions

340196719701980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Commonwealth v. Dravecz · Commonwealth Ex Rel. Shadd v. Myers · Sawyer v. State of Florida

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

  1. “In accord with our decision today, it is impermissible to penalize an individual for exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege when he is under police custodial interrogation. The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial the fact that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “No distinction can be drawn between statements which are direct confessions and statements which amount to `admissions' of part or all of an offense. The privilege against self-incrimination protects the individual from being compelled to incriminate himself in any manner; it does not distinguish degrees of incrimination.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"The determinative question on this appeal is whether the introduction by the state, without objection, of testimony that the accused, while in custody, remained silent in the face of an accusation of guilt of the crime for which he was arrested and charged, constituted reversible error." (p. 576)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.