336 So. 2d 805 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2004
17 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 · Brown v. Illinois · Ashe v. Swenson · Michigan v. Tucker · State v. Richmond
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"* * * In securing evidence, the state may not obtain a first statement by violation of constitutional safeguards, and then claim that a second confession secured by reason of the illegal first confession is admissible because (directly as the result of the first illegal admissions) the accused now again freely admits his guilt (since he has already `confessed', albeit the alleged confession is illegal and inadmissible). See Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 , 95 S.Ct. 2254 , 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975). "Nevertheless, if the second confession is truly voluntary and is not a product of the first, it is not inadmissible simply because of any technical deficiency in the Miranda warnings given before the first interrogation. The second confession may nevertheless be admissible, if (granting establishment of the prior technical illegality) it is not obtained by exploitation of the initial illegality, but instead is shown by the state to be sufficiently an act of free will entirely purged of and independent of the primary taint. See Brown v. Illinois at 95 S.Ct. 2259 (1975)." (Emphasis supplied.) 336 So.2d at 807 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“inherent possibility of prejudice and in order to assure that an accused is convicted only on the basis of legally admissible evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“no effort was made to exploit the viewing, such as by demonstrative use or in argument.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brown
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.