State v. Hinkle’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
1 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently October 2001 · most notably State v. Donesay (1998), State v. Young (1976)
1 district · 28 state decisions
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 · Haley v. Ohio · Gallegos v. State of Colorado · Reck v. Pate · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and Aberbathy v. Sullivan
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Police officers are authorized to investigate and obtain information from a juvenile relative to a crime, and when there are sufficient grounds to believe a crime has been committed and the juvenile committed the crime, they must then deliver the juvenile into the hands of the proper juvenile authorities along with all information in their possession.” (p. 478.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Winston““. . . The age of the juvenile, the length of the questioning, the juvenile’s education, the juvenile’s prior experience with the police, and the juvenile’s mental state are all factors to be considered in determining the voluntariness and admissibility of a juvenile’s confession into evidence.” Id., Syl. f 2.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cross““Our decision is not intended to hamper the traditional function of police officers in investigating crime . . . General on-the-scene questioning as to facts surrounding a crime or other general questioning of citizens in the fact-finding process is not affected by our holding. . . .’’ (p. 477.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Phippen
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.