State v. Register’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

33 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A statement may be held involuntary if induced by threats or violence, or if obtained by any direct or implied promises, or if obtained by the exertion of improper influence. State v. Rochester, 301 S.C. 196 , 391 S.E.2d 244 (1990). However, this Court and the United States Supreme Court have held that misrepresentations of evidence by police, although a relevant factor, do not render an otherwise voluntary confession inadmissible. Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731 , 89 S.Ct. 1420 , 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969) (confession voluntary despite police misrepresentation that associate had confessed); State v. Rabon, 275 S.C. 459 , 272 S.E.2d 634 (1980) (confession voluntary despite police misrepresenting the evidence that had been accumulated); Furthermore, a defendant’s will is not overborne when police misrepresent the facts leading him to believe that information of his guilt is greater than it actually is. Ledbetter v. Edwards, 35 F.3d 1062 (6th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1145 , 115 S.Ct. 2584 , 132 L.Ed.2d 833 (1995) (defendant’s will was not overborne when police misrepresented the evidence convincing him to confess); State v. Von Dohlen, 322 S.C. 234 , 471 S.E.2d 689 (1996) (record failed to establish that defendant’s will was overborne by police misrepresentation of evidence rendering his confession involuntary).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Parker

2. “The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches when adversarial judicial proceedings have been initiated and at all critical stages. Compare Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 , 97 S.Ct. 1232 , 51 L.Ed.2d 424 (1977) with Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625 , 106 S.Ct. 1404 , 89 L.Ed.2d 631 (1986). Hence, the right to counsel in judicial proceedings is distinguished from the Fifth Amendment Miranda— Edwards right to speak with counsel upon request in a custodial setting. McNeil v. Wisconsin, 501 U.S. 171 , 111 S.Ct. 2204 , 115 L.Ed.2d 158 (1991); State v. Wilder, 306 S.C. 535 , 413 S.E.2d 323 (1991). The Sixth Amendment right does not attach simply because the defendant has been arrested or because the investigation has focused on him. Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293 , 87 S.Ct. 408 , 17 L.Ed.2d 374 (1966). Further, the Sixth Amendment right attaches only “post-indictment”, at least in the questioning/statement setting. See Michigan v. Harvey, 494 U.S. 344 , 110 S.Ct. 1176 , 108 L.Ed.2d 293 (1990).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kennedy