Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 347 F.2d 96 - Carroll v. Boles

Carroll v. Boles’s Empirical Analysis

347 F.2d 96 · 1965

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 1971
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Spry v. Boles · Mounts v. Boles · Crabtree v. Boles · Hooker v. Boles

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

  1. “As to the minimum requirements of due process and fundamental fairness, this court stated in Mounts v. Boles, 4 Cir., 326 F.2d 186 (1963), at page 188: “ * * * To satisfy the minimum requirements of fundamental fairness under the circumstances the prisoner should have been told of his right to admit, or to deny, or remain silent and have the issue of his identity submitted to a jury. Furthermore, he should have been told that the consequences of his admissions would be a mandatory life sentence. * * * These principles were recently applied in Crabtree v. Boles, 4 Cir., 339 F.2d 22 (1964), where the court concluded from the facts in that case that the prisoner had been “duly cautioned.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.