Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 325 N.C. 232 - State v. Hoyle

State v. Hoyle’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably State v. Call (1998), State v. Jennings (1993)

31 state decisions

1501989199020002010decided

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 · Doyle v. Ohio · State v. Williams · State v. Robbins · State v. Freeland

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

  1. “The United States Supreme Court held in Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 , 49 L. Ed. 2d 91 (1976), that when a person under arrest has been advised of his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966), which includes the right to remain silent, there is an implicit promise that the silence will not be used against that person.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Who said anything, until yesterday, about [the victim] having grabbed his gun? Who? When was there an opportunity to say that? For months and that night. You think what you would do. If somebody had severely beaten you, if somebody had caused you to think that you had to defend yourself, if somebody had struggled with you over a gun and had accidently shot themselves, don’t you think, when the police were there and polite and nice and trying to get to the truth . . . don’t you think you would tell him then?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A violation of the defendant’s rights under the Constitution of the United States is prejudicial unless the appellate court finds that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden is upon the State to demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the error was harmless.”
    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.