Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 348 Md. 337 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
October 2013
most recently cited

26 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Edwards v. Arizona · Arizona v. Fulminante · Copeland v. United States · Tichnell 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[o]ne common thread that runs through our cases is that the promise must have caused the suspect to confess. If a suspect did not rely on an interrogator’s comments, obviously the statement is admissible regardless of whether the interrogator had articulated an improper inducement.” (Emphasis added.) Thus, it is the trial judge’s responsibility to determine not only if an inducement was made, but to ascertain further whether or not the defendant was influenced by the inducement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Five, the youthful age of the Defendant at the time of the crime.”
    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.