Leyra v. Denno’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
393 federal appellate · 44 district · 274 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 962 later decisions (99 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2022 · most notably Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera (1966), Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1973)
393 federal appellate · 44 district · 274 state decisions — followed in 36 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States ex rel. Leyra v. Denno (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Brown v. Allen · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Lisenba v. People of State of California · Haley v. Ohio · Brown v. State of Mississippi
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 962 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For an hour and a half or more the techniques of a highly trained psychiatrist were used to break petitioner’s will in order to get him to say he had murdered his parents. Time and time and time again the psychiatrist told petitioner how much he wanted to and could help him, how bad it would be for petitioner if he did not confess, and how much better he would feel, and how much lighter and easier it would be on him if he would just unbosom himself to the doctor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Beaty v. Schriro · Miller v. Fenton“so close that one must say the facts of one control the character of the other”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Our decisions under [the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment] have made clear that convictions following the admission into evidence of confessions which are involuntary, i. e., the product of coercion, either physical or psychological, cannot stand. This is not so because such confessions are unlikely to be true but because the methods used to extract them offend an underlying principle in the enforcement of our criminal law: that ours is an accusatorial and not an inquisitorial system-a system in which the State must establish guilt by evidence independently and freely secured and may not by coercion prove its charge against an accused out of his own mouth.”
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.