Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2007 UT App 65 - State v. Levin

2007 UT App 65 - State v. Levin’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Rhode Island v. Innis · Berkemer v. McCarty · California v. Beheler · Stansbury v. California · Key Tronic Corp. v. United States

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

  1. “'[Nlo [objective] indicia of arrest such as readied handcuffs, locked doors[,] or drawn guns were present'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the other three factors indicate an absence of custody, and [we] halve] emphasized that these factors may outweigh the single factor that the investigation had focused on [the defendant].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] person is in custody for purposes of Miranda when the person's ‘freedom of action is curtalled to a degree associated with formal arrest.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.