State v. Anonymous’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 district · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably Dowling v. Slotnik (1998), State v. Pinder (1999)
2 district · 53 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 · Edwards v. Arizona · Davis v. United States · Oregon v. Hass · Smith 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he right of an accused to have an attorney present during custodial interrogation by the police [is] an essential component of the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. In Miranda, the court held that when an accused person indicates in any manner at any stage of the process that he wishes to consult with an attorney before speaking there can be no questioning, and the police must stop the interrogation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Between June 4, 1992 and August 18, 1994 a series of acts of vandalism occurred in and around the Towns of Had-dam and Killingworth, including: ... (2) the destruction of a wooden street sign by arson; ... and (4) the total or partial destruction of several school buses on the premises of the Haddam-Killing-worth High School by arson ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“has since narrowed this aspect of the Miranda decision by emphasizing that the right to the presence of counsel during custodial interrogation . . . is a prophylactic rule . . . and . . . that an accused's request for counsel under Miranda must be objectively unequivocal.”
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.