Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 342 SO2D 49 - Medders v. State

Medders v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
July 1982
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Frazier v. Cupp · United States v. Crisp · Flannagin v. State · 54 Ala. App. 591 - Woods v. State

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

  1. “"The law is well-settled that intoxication short of mania or such an impairment of the will or mind as to make a person confessing unconscious of the meaning of his words, will not render a confession inadmissible. The existence of intoxication which would effect the voluntariness of a confession is primarily a question of fact which is first addressed to the trial judge to determine the admissibility and later to the jury for whatever consideration it may deem appropriate."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “unconscious of the meaning of his words.”
    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.