Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 348 So. 2d 434 - Holt v. State

348 So. 2d 434 - Holt v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
April 2003
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2003

12 state decisions

701977198019902000decided

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 Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · Jones v. United States · United States v. Ventresca · Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden

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

  1. “1. The preliminary hearing on the question of the admissibility of a confession must be in the absence of the jury and should be conducted before the trial on the merits begins. 2. The State has the burden of proving the voluntariness of a confession. This burden is met by testimony of an officer that the confession was voluntarily made without any threats, coercion, or offer of reward. Such testimony makes out a prima facie case for the State on the question of voluntariness. 3. When, after the State has made out a prima facie case as to the voluntariness of the confession, the accused offers testimony that violence, threats of violence, or offers of reward induced the confession, then the State must offer all the officers who were present when the accused was questioned and when the confession was made, or give an adequate reason for the absence of any such witness. The foregoing rules have been stated in numerous cases. We strongly emphasize that in every case where the defendant takes the stand after the State has made a prima facie case of voluntariness and testifies to any fact which, if true, would tend to show that the confession was not voluntary, the State should offer all the officers who were present when the accused was questioned or give an adequate reason for the absence of any such witness.”
    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.