Wood v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Wood and his counsel agreed to a polygraph examination to be conducted by the O.S.B.I. Wood’s counsel accompanied him to the polygraph session but was excluded from the examination room because O.S.B.I. policy prohibited counsel’s presence. Counsel waited outside. • After the polygraph examination was concluded, and while counsel was still outside, an O.S.B.I. agent Mirandized Wood and then questioned him, successfully obtaining an incriminating statement which was admitted against him at trial. This procedure violated Wood’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel and admitting this illegally obtained statement requires reversal. In Wyrick v. Fields [ 459 U.S. 42 , 103 S.Ct. 394 , 74 L.Ed.2d 214 (1982) ], the defendant agreed to a polygraph examination and attended the exam without counsel. Here counsel was present and was excluded from the session. Wood and his attorney had agreed to a polygraph exam and it follows that anything Wood said during the exam could be used against him. However, nothing in this record indicates that Wood agreed to post-polygraph interrogation without counsel. FN2. As a general rule, a confession obtained in anticipation of, during, or following a polygraph examination is not inadmissible. Young v. State, 1983 OK CR 126 , 670 P.2d 591, § 13 , 670 P.2d 591, 594 . Additionally, Brewer v. Williams [ 430 U.S. 387 , 97 S.Ct. 1232 , 51 L.Ed.2d 424 (1977) ] holds that an individual against whom adversary proceedings have begun has the right to legal representat”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 216 W. Va. 392 - State v. Jones