Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 292 So. 2d 220 - State v. Levy

292 So. 2d 220 - State v. Levy’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
May 2009
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 2009

5 state decisions

301974198019902000decided

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 · Terry v. Ohio · Escobedo v. Illinois · Adams v. Williams · Orozco v. Texas

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

  1. “" Miranda prohibits the use of statements `stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant,' in the absence of the procedural safeguards required by this decision, such as informing the accused person of his right to remain silent. 384 U.S. 444 , 86 S.Ct. 1612 . Custodial interrogation means `questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.' Id. `This is what we meant in Escobedo [cited below] when we spoke of an investigation which had focused on an accused.' Id., at Footnote 4. "On the other hand, the court in Miranda specifically noted: `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.... In such situations the compelling atmosphere inherent in the process of in-custody interrogation is not necessarily present.' 384 U.S. 477 -478, 86 S.Ct. 1629 -1630. "Nevertheless, an earlier decision, Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), whose holdings were amplified by Miranda , had marked the area requiring constitutional safeguard as where `the investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect', 378 U.S. 490 , 84 S.Ct. 1765 . See State v. T”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Yes that's my husband and I shot the son of a bitch. I shot him, because he slapped me.”
    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.