United States v. Vanterpool’s Empirical Analysis
394 F.2d 697 · 1968
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently December 2008 · most notably State v. Ralls (1974), Fowle v. United States (1969)
31 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 12 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.
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor · Walder v. United States · Groshart v. United States
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. . the words of Miranda do not constitute a ritualistic formula which must be repeated without variation in order to be effective. Words which convey the substance of the warning along with the required information are sufficient.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“he had a right `to consult with a lawyer at this time'”
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.