Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 220 SO3D 338 - Woolf v. State

Woolf v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2014

Citation profile

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

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division · Batson v. Kentucky · Witherspoon v. Illinois

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. “‘“To decide if a suspect is in custody [for purposes of triggering a Miranda warning], the court, looking at the totality of the circumstances, must find that a reasonable person in the suspect’s position would believe that he or she is not free to leave.’ Seagroves v. State, 726 So.2d 738, 742 (Ala.Crim.App.1998).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[M]ixed views on or reservations concerning the death penalty are a race-neutral reason for a strike of a prospective juror.”
    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.