355 So. 2d 1386 - McDougle v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Once warnings have been given, the subsequent procedure is clear. If the individual indicates in any manner, at any time prior to or during questioning, that he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease. At this point he has shown that he intends to exercise his Fifth Amendment privilege; any statement taken after the person invokes his privilege cannot be other than the product of compulsion, subtle or otherwise." 384 U.S. at 473-474 , 86 S.Ct. at 1627-1628 , 16 L.Ed.2d at 723 . [Emphasis added]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Murphy v. State · 461 So. 2d 686 - Jones v. State

2. “The vast majority of federal and state courts has concluded the Miranda opinion does not create a per se proscription of further interrogation once the person being questioned has expressed a desire to remain silent. Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 , 96 S.Ct. 321 , 46 L.Ed.2d 313 (1975). What Miranda apparently requires is cessation of interrogation when requested and if subsequently there is a reasonable basis for inferring that a suspect has voluntarily changed his mind, new and adequate warnings must be given. U.S. v. Collins, 462 F.2d 792 (2d Cir.1972) (en banc); cert. den., 409 U.S. 988 , 93 S.Ct. 343 , 34 L.Ed.2d 254 (1972); U.S. v. Jakakas, 423 F. Supp. 564 (E.D.N.Y. 1976). [ 355 So.2d at 1388 ].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Murphy v. State