Lonnie Mitchell v. Dan D. Stephens, Superintendent of Arkansas State Penitentiary’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions

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

1. ““It is to be observed again that as to some of these facts there is sharp conflict in the evidence. Thomas and others testified of free access to Mitchell and of frequent consultations. It is true that the coercion issue was not raised and its existence was even specifically denied by counsel during the trial. But if Mr. Thomas’ testimony is to be accepted, this was a matter of definite and deep concern to him. He reviewed it with Mitchell, but he was given no material with which to work. In any event, it is before the court now and Mitchell, as we have held above, is to have his day in court on this claim and must make his case if he can.” (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Mitchell v. Bishop

2. ““We therefore do not believe that the holding in Escobedo has a factual parallel or effective application here. If Mitchell’s rape confession was the product of coercion and hence was inadmissible, this will be due to other factors and other aspects and not to fundamental unfairness because of the absence of counsel at the confession.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Miller v. United States

3. “But Jackson v. Denno has now been decided and there is no serious question relative to retrospective application”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State of Minnesota Ex Rel. Glen R. Holscher v. Ralph H. Tahash, Warden, Minnesota State Penitentiary