Williams v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “But Miranda and Dean do not stand for the proposition that once the police have interrogated an unwarned subject, all statements thereafter made by him are inadmissible. Both decisions are limited to statements resulting from the compelling influences of police interrogation, and by police interrogation is meant “questioning initiated by law enforcement officers.” 384 U.S. at 444 . Miranda specifically recognizes the admissibility of a statement if it is made “in the unfettered exercise of [the suspect’s] own will.” 384 U.S. at 460 . And Dean recognizes the admissibility of a “statement given freely and voluntarily without any compelling influences.” 209 Va. at 668 , 166 S.E.2d at 230 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 12 Va. App. 827 - Mier v. Commonwealth

2. “Suffice it to say, in rejecting this contention, that counsel overlook or brush aside the fact that Wansley’s spontaneous admission resulted from an unprompted question asked by his mother, not from questioning by [the probation officer] or the police or any other person. None of the Supreme Court cases cited by counsel, or any other Supreme Court case of which we are aware, holds that the Constitution precludes evidence of an admission made by a juvenile or adult under those circumstances.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 12 Va. App. 827 - Mier v. Commonwealth