Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 343 WIS2D 220 - State v. Spaeth

State v. Spaeth’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
March 2023
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Malloy v. Hogan · Kastigar v. United States · Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor · Minnesota v. Murphy

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

  1. “derived from a legitimate source wholly independent of the compelled testimony.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “No person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[The probation agent's] own testimony revealed that Spaeth was required to take the polygraph examination or face a sanction, including possible revocation. This compulsion is authorized by statute and rule, demonstrated in the cases, and testified to by the [Department of Corrections] agent involved. All parties agree that this case involves compulsion. As a result, we have no difficulty determining that Spaeth was compelled, under the rules of his probation, to answer truthfully during the polygraph examination.”
    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.