Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 Ind. 48 - Thompson v. State

Thompson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
May 1992
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 1992

17 state decisions

130197119801990decided

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

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

  1. ““It is contended that the waiver which was read and explained to the appellant only told him that he was entitled to a lawyer, but that the court would appoint the lawyer, inferring that he was prejudiced because he would have to wait for the lawyer. The waiver properly stated the law. No one can appoint a lawyer but the trial court. Regarding this point the court in Miranda stated: ‘This does not mean, as some have suggested, that each police station must have a ‘station house lawyer’ present at all times to advise prisoners.’” Thompson v. State (1971), 256 Ind. 48, 54 , 267 N. E. 2d 49, 52 .”
    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.