State v. Holland’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably State v. Rhines (1996), State v. Wright (1999)
2 federal appellate · 40 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 · Edwards v. Arizona · Brewer v. Williams · Jones v. Nor-Tex Agencies, Inc. · Lehman Bros. v. Lilly
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not mean damage to the opponent's case that results from the legitimate probative force of the evidence; rather, it refers to the unfair advantage that results from the capacity of the evidence to persuade by illegitimate means.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rhines · State v. Lowther“A defendant can waive his privilege against self-incrimination and the rights that go along with it, provided that the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently. Miranda, supra . To determine whether the waiver was made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently, we must look to the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background experience, and conduct of the accused. (citations omitted) We must also consider whether the defendant knew of the nature of the offense for which he was charged or suspected....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Satter v. Solem · State v. Phillips“This syndrome means that a child has received repeated and/or serious injuries by non-accidental means; characteristically, these injuries are inflicted by someone who is ostensibly earing for the child. There are several elements that are the criteria for the “battered child syndrome.” They are (1) the child is usually under three years of age; (2) there is evidence of bone injury at different times; (3) there are subdural hemato-mas with or without skull fractures; (4) there is a seriously injured child who does not have a history given that fits the injuries; (5) there is evidence of soft tissue injury; (6) there is evidence of neglect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. McKowen
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.